ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2005
Patients and medical statistics. Interest, confidence, and ability.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Different Measures, Different Outcomes? A Systematic Review of Performance-Based versus Self-Reported Measures of Health Literacy and Numeracy.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Pooled it
- A survey study of women's responses to information about overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening in Britain.British journal of cancer · 2014Trial
- Parents' perspectives on the use of statistics to convey uncertainty in the NICU: a qualitative analysis.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026Article
- Understanding Cancer Treatment Decision Making Among Cancer Survivors: Weighing Cancer Recurrence Versus Cardiotoxicity.Psycho-oncology · 2025Article
- Perceptions of Health Misinformation on Social Media: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR infodemiology · 2024Article
- An Exploratory Study on the Impacts of Individual Skills and Health Information Exposure on Perceptions of Cancer Control and Expert Competence.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023Article
- Patterns of Change in Parental Health Literacy in Relation to Children's Oral Health.Health literacy research and practice · 2023Article
- Public Engagement in Digital Recommendations for Promoting Healthy Parental Behaviours from Preconception through the First 1000 Days.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Article
- Health Literacy Within a Diverse Community-Based Cohort: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2021Article
- Effects of Objective and Subjective Health Literacy on Patients' Accurate Judgment of Health Information and Decision-Making Ability: Survey Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Supporting the Implementation of Connected Care Technologies in the Veterans Health Administration: Cross-Sectional Survey Findings from the Veterans Engagement with Technology Collaborative (VET-C) Cohort.Journal of participatory medicine · 2020Article
- Expanded access to investigational drugs: balancing patient safety with potential therapeutic benefits.Expert opinion on investigational drugs · 2018Review
- The relationship between low perceived numeracy and cancer knowledge, beliefs, and affect.PloS one · 2018Article
- Article
- Factors Affecting Physicians' Intentions to Communicate Personalized Prognostic Information to Cancer Patients at the End of Life: An Experimental Vignette Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2016Article
- Brief screening items to identify spanish-speaking adults with limited health literacy and numeracy skills.BMC health services research · 2015Article
- Article
- Development and validation of the numeracy understanding in Medicine Instrument short form.Journal of health communication · 2014Article
- Racial and ethnic differences in direct-to-consumer genetic tests awareness in HINTS 2007: sociodemographic and numeracy correlates.Journal of genetic counseling · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeople are increasingly presented with medical statistics. There are no existing measures to assess their level of interest or confidence in using medical statistics.
objectiveTo develop 2 new measures, the STAT-interest and STAT-confidence scales, and assess their reliability and validity.
designSurvey with retest after approximately 2 weeks. SUBJECTS: Two hundred and twenty-four people were recruited from advertisements in local newspapers, an outpatient clinic waiting area, and a hospital open house. MEASURES: We developed and revised 5 items on interest in medical statistics and 3 on confidence understanding statistics.
resultsStudy participants were mostly college graduates (52%); 25% had a high school education or less. The mean age was 53 (range 20 to 84) years. Most paid attention to medical statistics (6% paid no attention). The mean (SD) STAT-interest score was 68 (17) and ranged from 15 to 100. Confidence in using statistics was also high: the mean (SD) STAT-confidence score was 65 (19) and ranged from 11 to 100. STAT-interest and STAT-confidence scores were moderately correlated (r=.36, P<.001). Both scales demonstrated good test-retest repeatability (r=.60, .62, respectively), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha=0.70 and 0.78), and usability (individual item nonresponse ranged from 0% to 1.3%). Scale scores correlated only weakly with scores on a medical data interpretation test (r=.15 and .26, respectively).
conclusionThe STAT-interest and STAT-confidence scales are usable and reliable. Interest and confidence were only weakly related to the ability to actually use data.
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.