Using natural frequencies to improve diagnostic inferences.

scientific article published in May 1998

Using natural frequencies to improve diagnostic inferences. is …
instance of (P31):
scholarly articleQ13442814

External links are
P356DOI10.1097/00001888-199805000-00024
P698PubMed publication ID9609869

P50authorGerd GigerenzerQ108184
P2093author name stringHoffrage U
P433issue5
P407language of work or nameEnglishQ1860
P921main subjectdiagnosisQ16644043
P304page(s)538-540
P577publication date1998-05-01
P1433published inAcademic MedicineQ15751327
P1476titleUsing natural frequencies to improve diagnostic inferences.
P478volume73

Reverse relations

cites work (P2860)
Q96303325A New Visualization for Probabilistic Situations Containing Two Binary Events: The Frequency Net
Q85979013A Randomised Assessment of Trainee Doctors' Understanding and Interpretation of Diagnostic Test Results
Q61448606A qualitative study of cardiovascular disease risk communication in NHS Health Check using different risk calculators: protocol for the RIsk COmmunication in NHS Health Check (RICO) study
Q33713120Accepting risk in clinical research: is the gene therapy field becoming too risk-averse?
Q92478538An Eye-Tracking Study of Statistical Reasoning With Tree Diagrams and 2 × 2 Tables
Q47374743Anomalies in the detection of change: When changes in sample size are mistaken for changes in proportions
Q48278453Another chance for good reasoning
Q37846221Assessment for selection for the health care professions and specialty training: consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference
Q35635753Basic understanding of posterior probability
Q39548603Bridging the gap between clinical practice and diagnostic clinical epidemiology: pilot experiences with a didactic model based on a logarithmic scale
Q64056739Can Positive Framing Reduce Nocebo Side Effects? Current Evidence and Recommendation for Future Research
Q41496250Can facts trump unconditional trust? Evidence-based information halves the influence of physicians' non-evidence-based cancer screening recommendations
Q48165611Cancer screening is not only about numbers.
Q35865146Chances and risks in medical risk communication
Q90329162Communicating risk of medication side-effects: role of communication format on risk perception
Q41882587Communicating study results to our patients: which way is best?
Q24794450Communicating with patients about harms and risks
Q73580851Communication of false-positive tests--can it be improved?
Q37717756Creating and field-testing the questionnaire for the assessment of knowledge about cervical cancer and its prevention among schoolgirls and female students.
Q57104905Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines
Q33373818Design of the BRISC study: a multicentre controlled clinical trial to optimize the communication of breast cancer risks in genetic counselling
Q47646740Do doctors understand the test characteristics of lung cancer screening?
Q38265977Doctors and numbers: an assessment of the critical risk interpretation test.
Q50335964Does exposure to simulated patient cases improve accuracy of clinicians' predictive value estimates of diagnostic test results? A within-subjects experiment at St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada
Q34148296Does prevalence matter to physicians in estimating post-test probability of disease? A randomized trial
Q37425138Effect of Communication Style on Perceptions of Medication Side Effect Risk among Pharmacy Students
Q35996141Effects of visualizing statistical information - an empirical study on tree diagrams and 2 × 2 tables
Q46131827Empirical assessment of expertise
Q50704599Evaluation of a cardiovascular disease risk assessment tool for the promotion of healthier lifestyles.
Q37192824Event-based versus process-based informed consent to address scientific evidence and uncertainties in ionising medical imaging
Q92106014Evidencing How Experience and Problem Format Affect Probabilistic Reasoning Through Interaction Analysis
Q24802065Explaining computation of predictive values: 2 x 2 table versus frequency tree. A randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN74278823]
Q53458334Facilitating informed choice in prenatal testing: how well are we doing?
Q52106795Facilitating normative judgments of conditional probability: frequency or nested sets?
Q51948175Frequency format facilitates reasoning in simple numerical tasks.
Q30317591GRADE guidelines: 12. Developing Summary of Findings tables - dichotomous outcomes
Q81433622Guest editorial
Q35557031Helping patients decide: ten steps to better risk communication
Q33461796How should risk be communicated to children: a cross-sectional study comparing different formats of probability information.
Q36495120How to foster citizens' statistical reasoning: implications for genetic counseling.
Q26798239How well do health professionals interpret diagnostic information? A systematic review
Q27345953Hypothetical Outcome Plots Outperform Error Bars and Violin Plots for Inferences about Reliability of Variable Ordering
Q37224629If children understand drawing straws and flipping coins, research participants can understand randomization
Q50044023Implantable cardioverter defibrillators in the context of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a lesson in patient autonomy.
Q59295900Improving Stock-Flow Reasoning With Verbal Formats
Q52942711Improving doctor-patient understanding of probability in communicating cancer-screening test findings.
Q44938603Improving public interpretation of probabilistic test results: distributive evaluations
Q43888330Insensitivity and oversensitivity to answer diagnosticity in hypothesis testing
Q35314104Instruction in information structuring improves Bayesian judgment in intelligence analysts
Q33675507Interpretation of evidence in data by untrained medical students: a scenario-based study
Q33561085Interventions to Improve Care for Patients with Limited Health Literacy.
Q80571048Intuitive t tests: lay use of statistical information
Q34354172Measuring patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk
Q39872627Natural Frequencies Do Not Foster Public Understanding of Medical Test Results
Q35763832Natural frequencies facilitate diagnostic inferences of managers
Q51857094Natural frequencies help older adults and people with low numeracy to evaluate medical screening tests.
Q36157899Natural frequencies improve Bayesian reasoning in simple and complex inference tasks
Q57177673Numeracy and Understanding of Quantitative Aspects of Predictive Models: A Pilot Study
Q33436392Optimizing the use of patient data to improve outcomes for patients: narcotics for chronic noncancer pain
Q46084960Outcomes of screening to prevent cancer: Authors' reply
Q39137909Pitfalls of counterfactual thinking in medical practice: preventing errors by using more functional reference points
Q99726890Quantitative examination of video-recorded NHS Health Checks: comparison of the use of QRISK2 versus JBS3 cardiovascular risk calculators
Q35612833Reasons for ordering spinal x-ray investigations: how they influence general practitioners' management
Q51967791Reducing the influence of anecdotal reasoning on people's health care decisions: is a picture worth a thousand statistics?
Q34117117Reviewing intuitive decision-making and uncertainty: the implications for medical education
Q38705644Risk communication in the dental practice
Q35133542Risk communication methods in hip fracture prevention: a randomised trial in primary care
Q36037510Simple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight
Q56785555Statistical illiteracy undermines informed shared decision making
Q93190413Study protocol: Randomized controlled trial of web-based decision support tools for high-risk women and healthcare providers to increase breast cancer chemoprevention
Q34354798Teaching methods in Hawler College of Medicine in Iraq: a qualitative assessment from teachers' perspectives
Q47266468The Barrier to Informed Choice in Cancer Screening: Statistical Illiteracy in Physicians and Patients
Q37580461The Impact of Visualizing Nested Sets. An Empirical Study on Tree Diagrams and Unit Squares
Q99631329The Interpretation of SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic Tests
Q34080171The cognitive imperative: thinking about how we think
Q28475969The effect of alternative summary statistics for communicating risk reduction on decisions about taking statins: a randomized trial
Q51697729The effect of graphical and numerical presentation of hypothetical prenatal diagnosis results on risk perception.
Q53084663The effects of absolute risks, relative risks, frequencies, and probabilities on decision quality.
Q36840606The ethics of information: absolute risk reduction and patient understanding of screening
Q35820273The risk of death by age, sex, and smoking status in the United States: putting health risks in context
Q35912944Toward an ecological analysis of Bayesian inferences: how task characteristics influence responses
Q59334965US gynecologists' estimates and beliefs regarding ovarian cancer screening's effectiveness 5 years after release of the PLCO evidence
Q44982844Urologists' referral attitude for sacral neuromodulation for treating refractory idiopathic overactive bladder syndrome: discrete choice experiment
Q24235966Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions
Q24243789Using different statistical formats for presenting health information
Q45821481Using tree diagrams without numerical values in addition to relative numbers improves students' numeracy skills: a randomized study in medical education
Q90311976Vaccine skepticism reflects basic cognitive differences in mortality-related event frequency estimation
Q33355873Vignette studies of medical choice and judgement to study caregivers' medical decision behaviour: systematic review
Q37827925Visions of rationality
Q35856951Visual aids improve diagnostic inferences and metacognitive judgment calibration
Q54247459Visualizing the Bayesian 2-test case: The effect of tree diagrams on medical decision making.
Q35751200What are the chances? Evaluating risk and benefit information in consumer health materials
Q60927268What do European women know about their female cancer risks and cancer screening? A cross-sectional online intervention survey in five European countries
Q52912807[Medical risk assessment--using the example of cancer screening].

Search more.