ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2005
Medical concepts related to individual risk are better explained with "plausibility" rather than "probability".
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Just Semantics? How Diagnostic Criteria Influence Physician-Patient Narratives in Alzheimer's Disease.Neuro-degenerative diseases · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence for predicting the risk of bone fragility fractures in osteoporosis.European radiology experimental · 2025Review
- Risk analyses in the intersection between patient and workplace safety: A case study of hazids in para-clinical supporting systems in specialized health care.SAGE open medicine · 2020Article
- General practice needs further development of theoretical knowledge.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2019Article
- Mathematical biomarkers for the autonomic regulation of cardiovascular system.Frontiers in physiology · 2013Review
- Practice guidelines and clinical risk assessment models: is it time to reform?BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2011Article
- The Framingham study and treatment guidelines for stroke prevention.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2008Article
- How artificial intelligence tools can be used to assess individual patient risk in cardiovascular disease: problems with the current methods.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe concept of risk has pervaded medical literature in the last decades and has become a familiar topic, and the concept of probability, linked to binary logic approach, is commonly applied in epidemiology and clinical medicine. The application of probability theory to groups of individuals is quite straightforward but can pose communication challenges at individual level. Few articles by the way have tried to focus the concept of "risk" at the individual subject level rather than at population level. DISCUSSION: The author has reviewed the conceptual framework which has led to the use of probability theory in the medical field in a time when the principal causes of death were represented by acute disease often of infective origin. In the present scenario, in which chronic degenerative disease dominate and there are smooth transitions between health and disease the use of fuzzy logic rather than binary logic would be more appropriate. The use of fuzzy logic in which more than two possible truth-value assignments are allowed overcomes the trap of probability theory when dealing with uncertain outcomes, thereby making the meaning of a certain prognostic statement easier to understand by the patient. SUMMARY: At individual subject level the recourse to the term plausibility, related to fuzzy logic, would help the physician to communicate to the patient more efficiently in comparison with the term probability, related to binary logic. This would represent an evident advantage for the transfer of medical evidences to individual subjects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.