Publication:
Cancer screening risk literacy of physicians in training: An experimental study.

dc.contributor.authorPetrova, Dafina
dc.contributor.authorMas, Guiliana
dc.contributor.authorNavarrete, Gorka
dc.contributor.authorRodriguez, Tania Tello
dc.contributor.authorOrtiz, Pedro J
dc.contributor.authorGarcia-Retamero, Rocio
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-25T13:36:19Z
dc.date.available2023-01-25T13:36:19Z
dc.date.issued2019-07-03
dc.description.abstractWe investigated what factors may foster or hinder physicians' cancer screening risk literacy-specifically the ability to understand evidence regarding screening effectiveness and make evidence-based recommendations to patients. In an experiment, physicians in training (interns and residents) read statistical information about outcomes from screening for cancer, and had to decide whether to recommend it to a patient. We manipulated the effectiveness of the screening (effective vs. ineffective at reducing mortality) and the demand of the patient to get screened (demand vs. no demand). We assessed participants' comprehension of the presented evidence and recommendation to the patient, as well as a-priori screening beliefs (e.g., that screening is always a good choice), numeracy, science literacy, knowledge of screening statistics, statistical education, and demographics. Stronger positive a-priori screening beliefs, lower knowledge of screening statistics, and lower numeracy were related to worse comprehension of the evidence. Physicians recommended against the ineffective screening but only if they showed good comprehension of the evidence. Physicians' recommendations were further based on the perceived benefits from screening but not on perceived harms, nor the patient's demands. The current study demonstrates that comprehension of cancer screening statistics and the ability to infer the potential benefits for patients are essential for evidence-based recommendations. However, strong beliefs in favor of screening fostered by promotion campaigns may influence how physicians evaluate evidence about specific screenings. Fostering physician numeracy skills could help counteract such biases and provide evidence-based recommendations to patients.
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0218821
dc.identifier.essn1932-6203
dc.identifier.pmcPMC6608976
dc.identifier.pmid31269051
dc.identifier.pubmedURLhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6608976/pdf
dc.identifier.unpaywallURLhttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0218821&type=printable
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10668/14214
dc.issue.number7
dc.journal.titlePloS one
dc.journal.titleabbreviationPLoS One
dc.language.isoen
dc.organizationEscuela Andaluza de Salud Pública-EASP
dc.page.numbere0218821
dc.pubmedtypeJournal Article
dc.pubmedtypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.accessRightsopen access
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject.meshAdult
dc.subject.meshDecision Making
dc.subject.meshEarly Detection of Cancer
dc.subject.meshEducation, Medical
dc.subject.meshFemale
dc.subject.meshForecasting
dc.subject.meshHumans
dc.subject.meshLiteracy
dc.subject.meshMale
dc.subject.meshMass Screening
dc.subject.meshNeoplasms
dc.subject.meshPhysicians
dc.subject.meshPsychometrics
dc.titleCancer screening risk literacy of physicians in training: An experimental study.
dc.typeresearch article
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dc.volume.number14
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
PMC6608976.pdf
Size:
799.01 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format