Trial reportBehavior research methods2013
A signal detection analysis of gist-based discrimination of genetic breast cancer risk.
Trial report in Behavior research methods, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Referral Decision Making of General Practitioners: A Signal Detection Study.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2019Article
- Using fuzzy-trace theory to understand and improve health judgments, decisions, and behaviors: A literature review.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pervasive biases in probability judgment render the probability scale a poor response mode for assessing risk judgments. By applying fuzzy trace theory, we used ordinal gist categories as a response mode, coupled with a signal detection model to assess risk judgments. The signal detection model is an extension of the familiar model used in binary choice paradigms. It provides three measures of discriminability-low versus medium risk, medium versus high risk, and low versus high risk-and two measures of response bias. We used the model to assess the effectiveness of BRCA Gist, an intelligent tutoring system designed to improve women's judgments and understanding of genetic risk for breast cancer. Participants were randomly assigned to the BRCA Gist intelligent tutoring system, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Web pages, or a control group, and then they rated cases that had been developed using the Pedigree Assessment Tool and also vetted by medical experts. BRCA Gist participants demonstrated increased discriminability for all three risk categories, relative to the control group; the NCI group showed increased discriminability for two of the three levels. This result suggests that BRCA Gist best improved discriminability among genetic risk categories, and both BRCA Gist and the NCI website improved participants' ability to discriminate, rather than simply shifting their decision criterion. A spreadsheet that fits the model and compares parameters across the conditions can be downloaded from the Behavior Research Methods website and used in any research involving categorical responses.
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.