Author
Listed:
- Hendrik Friederichs
- Sandra Ligges
- Anne Weissenstein
Abstract
Background. Physicians and medical students may lack sufficient numeracy skills to make treatment decisions, interpret test results, and practice evidence-based medicine. We evaluated whether the use of a tree diagram without numerical values as an aid for numerical processing might improve students’ test results when dealing with percentages. Methods. A prospective randomized study was carried out with 102 third-year students. Participants received 3 diagnostic test problems and were asked to determine positive predictive values. The information in these tests was expressed either in (1) natural frequencies, (2) conditional probabilities, or (3) conditional probabilities with a tree diagram without numbers. Results. Ninety-eight (96.1%) complete data sets could be obtained. The group working with natural frequencies achieved significantly higher test results ( n = 29, mean score: 1.1, P = 0.045) than the group working with conditional probabilities ( n = 34, mean score: 0.56). The students who were given a tree diagram in addition to conditional probabilities ( n = 35, mean score: 1.26) also achieved significantly better scores than the group with conditional probabilities alone ( P = 0.008). The difference between the group who had received natural frequencies and the group working with conditional probabilities and the tree diagram was not significant. Conclusions. We suggest the use of a tree diagram as a visual aid when dealing with diagnostic tests expressed in conditional probabilities.
Suggested Citation
Hendrik Friederichs & Sandra Ligges & Anne Weissenstein, 2014.
"Using Tree Diagrams without Numerical Values in Addition to Relative Numbers Improves Students’ Numeracy Skills,"
Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(2), pages 253-257, February.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:2:p:253-257
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13504499
Download full text from publisher
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:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:2:p:253-257. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.