HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Edwards, A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Edwards, A Topic Collections Relevant Article

Flexible rather than standardised approaches to communicating risks in health care

Correspondence to:
Dr A Edwards
Department of Primary Care, Swansea Clinical School, University of Wales Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP, UK; a.g.k.edwards@swan.ac.uk

Keywords: side effects; risk perception; drug information; patient-caregiver communication; decision making

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Informed medical decision making depends at least partly on understanding the benefits and harms of different treatment options. This requires clear and relevant risk communication. In practice this means that information should include both harms and benefits where relevant, and be presented honestly—not hiding information thought to be less desirable. Attention should be paid to the potential pitfalls of "framing"—how different formats such as relative and absolute risk can manipulate decisions made.¹ Certain types of risk information such as "natural frequencies" (for example, 1 in 10) are generally more consistently and accurately interpreted than percentages (for example, 10%). In percentages, the reference class (population or group to which the figure applies) is often not clearly specified.² For any data, though, there are uncertainties and these should be shared where evident.³ There is support for having a range of information formats available (a "toolbox") so that . . . [Full text of this article]

Relevant Article

Comparison of two methods of presenting risk information to patients about the side effects of medicines

P Knapp, D K Raynor, and D C Berry
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2004 13: 176-180. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Brezis, S. Israel, A. Weinstein-Birenshtock, P. Pogoda, A. Sharon, and R. Tauber Quality of informed consent for invasive procedures Int. J. Qual. Health Care, October 1, 2008; 20(5): 352 - 357. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J France, C Keen, and S Bowyer Communicating risk to emergency department patients with chest pain Emerg. Med. J., May 1, 2008; 25(5): 276 - 278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]