The framing effect of relative and absolute risk
- 1 October 1993
- journal article
- Published by Springer Nature in Journal of General Internal Medicine
- Vol. 8 (10) , 543-548
- https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02599636
Abstract
Objective: To test whether a patient’s perception of benefit is influenced by whether the benefit is presented in relative or absolute terms. Design: Questionnaire-based study. Setting: A general medicine outpatient clinic at a rural tertiary care center associated with a medical school. Patients: 470 of 511 consecutive patients who agreed to answer a questionnaire while waiting for their clinic visit. Mean age was 49.1 years, 62.1% were female, and 51.9% had at least one year of education beyond high school. Main outcome measures: Patient response to the choice of two equally efficacious medications for the management of a hypothetical serious disease. The benefit of one medication was stated in relative terms, the other in absolute terms. Patients could choose either medication alone, indicate indifference to the choice of medication, or choose not to answer. Main results: 56.8% of the patients chose the medication whose benefit was in relative terms.14.7% chose the medication whose benefit was in absolute terms. Only 15.5% were indifferent to the choice of medication. The patients preferred the medication whose benefit was in relative terms across a wide range of ages and educational levels. Further questioning suggested that the patients thought benefit was greater when expressed in relative terms because they ignored the underlying risk of disease and assumed it was one. Conclusions: The “framing” of benefit (or risk) in relative versus absolute terms may have a major influence on patient preference. Key words: framing; risk; patient preferences; benefit; decision making.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Effects of 0utcome Framing on Treatment Decisions in the Real WorldMedical Decision Making, 1989
- Effect of risk status on treatment criteria. Implications of hypertension trials.Hypertension, 1989
- Cholesterol and coronary heart disease. The importance of patient-specific attributable riskArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1988
- An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of TreatmentNew England Journal of Medicine, 1988
- Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: Influence of treatment outcome description, elicitation technique and treatment experience on preferencesJournal of Chronic Diseases, 1987
- How Medical Professionals Evaluate Expressions of ProbabilityNew England Journal of Medicine, 1986
- On the Elicitation of Preferences for Alternative TherapiesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1982
- The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of ChoiceScience, 1981
- Clinical Judgment: Psychological Research and Medical PracticeScience, 1976
- Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and BiasesScience, 1974