Ratio measures in leading medical journals: structured review of accessibility of underlying absolute risks
- 23 October 2006
- Vol. 333 (7581), 1248
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38985.564317.7c
Abstract
Objective To examine the accessibility of absolute riskin articles reporting ratio measures in leading medical journals. Design Structured review of abstracts presenting ratio measures. ible with a wide range of changes in the riskof death: from 20% to 10%, from 1% to 0.5%, and from 0.0004% to 0.0002%. Effects presented in relative terms alone have been repeatedly shown to seem more impressive than the same effects presented in absolute terms in studies of physicians, 23 policy makers, 4 and patients. 56 Moreover, providing absolute risks has been shown to improve patients' comprehension of statements of both absolute riskreduction and relative riskreduction. 7This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Modified Poisson Regression Approach to Prospective Studies with Binary DataAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2004
- Abstruse Comparisons The Problems of Numerical Contrasts of Two GroupsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1999
- What's the Relative Risk?JAMA, 1998
- The Role of Numeracy in Understanding the Benefit of Screening MammographyAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1997
- Evidence based purchasing: understanding results of clinical trials and systematic reviewsBMJ, 1995
- Communicating the Benefits of Chronic Preventive TherapyMedical Decision Making, 1995
- The framing effect of relative and absolute riskJournal of General Internal Medicine, 1993
- Measured Enthusiasm: Does the Method of Reporting Trial Results Alter Perceptions of Therapeutic Effectiveness?Annals of Internal Medicine, 1992
- Absolutely relative: How research results are summarized can affect treatment decisionsAmerican Journal Of Medicine, 1992
- The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical DataBiometrics, 1977