IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/xrs/sfbmaa/99-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Irren ist wahrscheinlich. Medizinische Experten und Laien bewerten Risiken oft falsch

Author

Listed:
  • Hoffrage, Ulrich

    (Sonderforschungsbereich 504)

Abstract

Several studies have reported that physicians have great difficulties in estimating the positive predictive value of a diagnostic test, that is, the probability of a disease being present given a positive test. I argue that the problem lies not only in physiciansã lack of statistical training, but in the way numerical information is presented in such studies and in medical curricula. External representation is part¸ of the reasoning process. Specifically, when information is represented in natural frequencies, rather than in probabilities or percentages, diagnostic inferences improve¨without any instruction in statistics. In the study reported here, physicians with an average of 14 years professional experience profit from natural frequencies about as much as naive laypeople. When information was presented in terms of probabilities (the traditional way), the physicians correctly estimated the predictive value in only 10 of the cases. With natural frequencies, this percentage increased to 46. Representing information in natural frequencies is a quick, effective, and low-cost method of helping physicians, AIDS counselors, and other experts to communicate with clients about risks, and clients to better understand these risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoffrage, Ulrich, 1999. "Irren ist wahrscheinlich. Medizinische Experten und Laien bewerten Risiken oft falsch," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 99-21, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    • Handle: RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:99-21
    Note: Financial Support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, SFB 504, at the University of Mannheim, is gratefully acknowledged.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:99-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Carsten Schmidt (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfmande.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.