Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Impact of numeracy on understanding of prostate cancer risk reduction in PSA screening.
Koo, Kevin; Brackett, Charles D; Eisenberg, Ellen H; Kieffer, Kelly A; Hyams, Elias S.
Afiliación
  • Koo K; Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States of America.
  • Brackett CD; Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States of America.
  • Eisenberg EH; Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States of America.
  • Kieffer KA; Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States of America.
  • Hyams ES; Section of Urology, Department of Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, United States of America.
PLoS One ; 12(12): e0190357, 2017.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29284055
Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer in men of average risk remains controversial. Patients' ability to incorporate risk reduction data into their decision-making may depend on their numeracy. We assessed the impact of patients' numeracy on their understanding of the risk reduction benefits of PSA screening. Men attending a general internal medicine clinic were invited to complete a survey. Four versions of the survey each included a three-item numeracy test and PSA risk reduction data, framed one of four ways: absolute (ARR) versus relative risk reduction (RRR), with or without baseline risk (BR). Respondents were asked to adjust their perceived risk of prostate-cancer mortality using the data presented. Accuracy of risk reduction was evaluated relative to how risk data were framed. Among a total of 200 respondents, a majority incorrectly answered one or more of the numeracy items. Overall accuracy of risk adjustment was only 20%. Accuracy varied with data framing: when presented with RRR, respondents were 13% accurate without BR and 31% accurate with BR; when presented with ARR, they were 0% accurate without BR and 35% accurate with BR. Including BR data significantly improved accuracy for both RRR (P = 0.03) and ARR groups (P < 0.01). Accuracy was significantly related to numeracy; numeracy scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 were associated with accuracy rates of six, five, nine, and 36 percent, respectively (P < 0.01). Overall, numeracy was significantly associated with the accuracy of interpreting quantitative benefits of PSA screening. Alternative methods of communicating risk may facilitate shared decision-making in the use of PSA screening for early detection of prostate cancer.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Antígeno Prostático Específico Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: PLoS One Asunto de la revista: CIENCIA / MEDICINA Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Neoplasias de la Próstata / Antígeno Prostático Específico Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: PLoS One Asunto de la revista: CIENCIA / MEDICINA Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos