Clinical Research
Effects of presenting risk information in different formats to cardiologists. A Latin American survey
Encuesta sobre los efectos de la presentación de los riesgos y beneficios en distintos formatos a cardiólogos latinoamericanos
Read
4890
Timeswas read the article
801
Total PDF
4089
Total HTML
Share statistics
array:23 [ "pii" => "S1405994014001633" "issn" => "14059940" "doi" => "10.1016/j.acmx.2014.09.003" "estado" => "S300" "fechaPublicacion" => "2015-01-01" "aid" => "160" "copyright" => "Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez" "copyrightAnyo" => "2013" "documento" => "article" "licencia" => "http://www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/" "subdocumento" => "fla" "cita" => "Arch Cardiol Mex. 2015;85:3-8" "abierto" => array:3 [ "ES" => true "ES2" => true "LATM" => true ] "gratuito" => true "lecturas" => array:2 [ "total" => 1831 "formatos" => array:3 [ "EPUB" => 56 "HTML" => 1365 "PDF" => 410 ] ] "itemSiguiente" => array:18 [ "pii" => "S1405994014001682" "issn" => "14059940" "doi" => "10.1016/j.acmx.2014.10.002" "estado" => "S300" "fechaPublicacion" => "2015-01-01" "aid" => "165" "copyright" => "Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez" "documento" => "article" "licencia" => "http://www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/" "subdocumento" => "fla" "cita" => "Arch Cardiol Mex. 2015;85:9-15" "abierto" => array:3 [ "ES" => true "ES2" => true "LATM" => true ] "gratuito" => true "lecturas" => array:2 [ "total" => 2667 "formatos" => array:3 [ "EPUB" => 57 "HTML" => 1981 "PDF" => 629 ] ] "es" => array:13 [ "idiomaDefecto" => true "cabecera" => "<span class="elsevierStyleTextfn">Investigación clínica</span>" "titulo" => "Efecto de cohorte al nacer sobre la prevalencia de factores de riesgo asociados a enfermedad coronaria en un país latinoamericano" "tienePdf" => "es" "tieneTextoCompleto" => "es" "tieneResumen" => array:2 [ 0 => "es" 1 => "en" ] "paginas" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "paginaInicial" => "9" "paginaFinal" => "15" ] ] "titulosAlternativos" => array:1 [ "en" => array:1 [ "titulo" => "Birth cohort effect on prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in coronary artery disease. Experience in a Latin-american country" ] ] "contieneResumen" => array:2 [ "es" => true "en" => true ] "contieneTextoCompleto" => array:1 [ "es" => true ] "contienePdf" => array:1 [ "es" => true ] "resumenGrafico" => array:2 [ "original" => 0 "multimedia" => array:7 [ "identificador" => "fig0015" "etiqueta" => "Figura 3" "tipo" => "MULTIMEDIAFIGURA" "mostrarFloat" => true "mostrarDisplay" => false "figura" => array:1 [ 0 => array:4 [ "imagen" => "gr3.jpeg" "Alto" => 1169 "Ancho" => 2485 "Tamanyo" => 113221 ] ] "descripcion" => array:1 [ "es" => "<p id="spar0070" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Prevalencia de dislipidemia según cohorte de edad y año de nacimiento.</p>" ] ] ] "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "autoresLista" => "Marisol Badiel, Magda Cepeda, Julián Ochoa, John H. Loaiza, Jorge G. Velásquez" "autores" => array:5 [ 0 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Marisol" "apellidos" => "Badiel" ] 1 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Magda" "apellidos" => "Cepeda" ] 2 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Julián" "apellidos" => "Ochoa" ] 3 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "John H." "apellidos" => "Loaiza" ] 4 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Jorge G." "apellidos" => "Velásquez" ] ] ] ] ] "idiomaDefecto" => "es" "EPUB" => "https://multimedia.elsevier.es/PublicationsMultimediaV1/item/epub/S1405994014001682?idApp=UINPBA00004N" "url" => "/14059940/0000008500000001/v2_201502270429/S1405994014001682/v2_201502270429/es/main.assets" ] "itemAnterior" => array:18 [ "pii" => "S1405994015000221" "issn" => "14059940" "doi" => "10.1016/j.acmx.2015.01.001" "estado" => "S300" "fechaPublicacion" => "2015-01-01" "aid" => "193" "copyright" => "Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez" "documento" => "article" "licencia" => "http://www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/" "subdocumento" => "sco" "cita" => "Arch Cardiol Mex. 2015;85:1-2" "abierto" => array:3 [ "ES" => true "ES2" => true "LATM" => true ] "gratuito" => true "lecturas" => array:2 [ "total" => 1495 "formatos" => array:3 [ "EPUB" => 43 "HTML" => 1010 "PDF" => 442 ] ] "es" => array:10 [ "idiomaDefecto" => true "cabecera" => "<span class="elsevierStyleTextfn">Editorial</span>" "titulo" => "Evolución continua" "tienePdf" => "es" "tieneTextoCompleto" => "es" "paginas" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "paginaInicial" => "1" "paginaFinal" => "2" ] ] "titulosAlternativos" => array:1 [ "en" => array:1 [ "titulo" => "Continuous assessment" ] ] "contieneTextoCompleto" => array:1 [ "es" => true ] "contienePdf" => array:1 [ "es" => true ] "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "autoresLista" => "Alfonso Buendía Hernández, Arturo Abundes Velasco, Héctor González Pacheco, Guering Eid Lidt, Hermes Ilarraza Lomelí, Pedro Iturralde Torres, Samuel Ramírez Marroquín, Carlos Jerjes Sánchez Díaz, Carlos Sierra Fernández, Juan Verdejo Paris" "autores" => array:10 [ 0 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Alfonso" "apellidos" => "Buendía Hernández" ] 1 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Arturo" "apellidos" => "Abundes Velasco" ] 2 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Héctor" "apellidos" => "González Pacheco" ] 3 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Guering" "apellidos" => "Eid Lidt" ] 4 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Hermes" "apellidos" => "Ilarraza Lomelí" ] 5 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Pedro" "apellidos" => "Iturralde Torres" ] 6 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Samuel" "apellidos" => "Ramírez Marroquín" ] 7 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Carlos" "apellidos" => "Jerjes Sánchez Díaz" ] 8 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Carlos" "apellidos" => "Sierra Fernández" ] 9 => array:2 [ "nombre" => "Juan" "apellidos" => "Verdejo Paris" ] ] ] ] ] "idiomaDefecto" => "es" "EPUB" => "https://multimedia.elsevier.es/PublicationsMultimediaV1/item/epub/S1405994015000221?idApp=UINPBA00004N" "url" => "/14059940/0000008500000001/v2_201502270429/S1405994015000221/v2_201502270429/es/main.assets" ] "en" => array:19 [ "idiomaDefecto" => true "cabecera" => "<span class="elsevierStyleTextfn">Clinical Research</span>" "titulo" => "Effects of presenting risk information in different formats to cardiologists. A Latin American survey" "tieneTextoCompleto" => true "paginas" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "paginaInicial" => "3" "paginaFinal" => "8" ] ] "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:4 [ "autoresLista" => "Raúl A. Borracci, Daniel J. Piñeiro, Eduardo B. Arribalzaga" "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => array:4 [ "nombre" => "Raúl A." "apellidos" => "Borracci" "email" => array:1 [ 0 => "raborracci@gmail.com" ] "referencia" => array:3 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etiqueta" => "<span class="elsevierStyleSup">a</span>" "identificador" => "aff0005" ] 1 => array:2 [ "etiqueta" => "<span class="elsevierStyleSup">b</span>" "identificador" => "aff0010" ] 2 => array:2 [ "etiqueta" => "<span class="elsevierStyleSup">*</span>" "identificador" => "cor0005" ] ] ] 1 => array:3 [ "nombre" => "Daniel J." "apellidos" => "Piñeiro" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etiqueta" => "<span class="elsevierStyleSup">a</span>" "identificador" => "aff0005" ] ] ] 2 => array:3 [ "nombre" => "Eduardo B." "apellidos" => "Arribalzaga" "referencia" => array:2 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etiqueta" => "<span class="elsevierStyleSup">b</span>" "identificador" => "aff0010" ] 1 => array:2 [ "etiqueta" => "<span class="elsevierStyleSup">c</span>" "identificador" => "aff0015" ] ] ] ] "afiliaciones" => array:3 [ 0 => array:3 [ "entidad" => "Sociedad Interamericana de Cardiología, México, D.F., Mexico" "etiqueta" => "a" "identificador" => "aff0005" ] 1 => array:3 [ "entidad" => "Bioestadística, Facultad de Ciencias Biomédicas, Universidad Austral, Argentina" "etiqueta" => "b" "identificador" => "aff0010" ] 2 => array:3 [ "entidad" => "Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Ciencias Empresariales y Sociales (UCES), Argentina" "etiqueta" => "c" "identificador" => "aff0015" ] ] "correspondencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "cor0005" "etiqueta" => "⁎" "correspondencia" => "Corresponding author at: La Pampa 3030, 1428 Buenos Aires, Argentina. Tel.: +54 11 4784 5917; fax: +54 11 4961 6027." ] ] ] ] "titulosAlternativos" => array:1 [ "es" => array:1 [ "titulo" => "Encuesta sobre los efectos de la presentación de los riesgos y beneficios en distintos formatos a cardiólogos latinoamericanos" ] ] "resumenGrafico" => array:2 [ "original" => 0 "multimedia" => array:7 [ "identificador" => "fig0005" "etiqueta" => "Figure 1" "tipo" => "MULTIMEDIAFIGURA" "mostrarFloat" => true "mostrarDisplay" => false "figura" => array:1 [ 0 => array:4 [ "imagen" => "gr1.jpeg" "Alto" => 1396 "Ancho" => 1664 "Tamanyo" => 118897 ] ] "descripcion" => array:1 [ "en" => "<p id="spar0045" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Relative distribution of countries participating in the survey, compared with the proportion of cardiologists in the region (except Brazil).</p>" ] ] ] "textoCompleto" => "<span class="elsevierStyleSections"><span id="sec0005" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0065">Introduction</span><p id="par0005" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">Misinterpretation of numerical data can be induced by the form in which the risks and benefits of clinical trials are reported. These different interpretations influence not only the opinion of medical students and patients, but also the physician care decision-taking process.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0005"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">1–3</span></a> Previous research demonstrated that presenting treatment benefits in terms of relative risk reduction (RRR) rather than in terms of absolute risk reduction (ARR) or number needed to treat (NNT) might favor the perception of outcome effectiveness.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0020"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">4</span></a> Clinical experience and medical training do not seem to be sufficient to protect physicians against the tendency to interpret data erroneously. A recent meta-analysis by Covey<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0025"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">5</span></a> has shown that these framing effects are heterogeneous and seem to be moderated by key differences between the methodologies used in each study. Several authors have speculated that differences in the presentation of outcomes may lead to discrepancies in decision-making and treatments, but previous studies have reported a wide variety of results. Therefore, considering the importance of the problem in cardiological medical practice, a cognitive evaluation study was performed in a group of Latin American cardiologists to assess how the manner in which risks and benefits of screening methods and treatments are presented can affect medical care decision-making.</p></span><span id="sec0010" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0070">Methods</span><p id="par0010" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">This study was performed in a non-randomized sample of 406 Spanish speaking cardiologists included in the Interamerican Society of Cardiology register, proportionally representing the regional distribution of Cardiology specialists. They underwent <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">via</span> e-mail an anonymous and voluntary assessment on the interpretation of results of several medical investigations. The questionnaire was in Spanish and consisted of nine questions with multiple choice answers. The questions presented the summary of clinical results from different controlled trials, showing the data as relative risk reduction (RRR), absolute risk reduction (ARR) or number needed to treat (NNT), with or without associated graphs. Questions were randomly ordered and were associated as follows:<ul class="elsevierStyleList" id="lis0005"><li class="elsevierStyleListItem" id="lsti0005"><p id="par0015" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">Group 1: a question expressed with RRR and NNT, the same question with RRR, the same question with ARR and the same question with NNT.</p></li><li class="elsevierStyleListItem" id="lsti0010"><p id="par0020" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">Group 2: a second question expressed with AAR, the same question with RRR and the same question with NNT.</p></li><li class="elsevierStyleListItem" id="lsti0015"><p id="par0025" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">Group 3: finally, a third question presented with RRR and the same question with ARR, together with corresponding graphic representations. In this case, the relative proportion of the graphs was biased to favor the choice of RRR. The abridged questions are shown in <a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#tbl0005">Table 1</a>. To compare with other studies, test questions were formulated according to three previous studies on the same subject.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0020"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">4,6,7</span></a> The wording of these questions intended to overcome previous study problems, mainly through the addition of examples containing NNT, the combination of RRR<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>+<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>NNT and supporting graphs. At the end of each example, the physician was asked to consider these results as sufficient evidence favoring the proposed treatment. The multiple choice answer to each question could be answered on some occasions with “yes, no, or I do not have sufficient information”, and in others with “very useful, moderately or slightly useful, not useful, or I do not have sufficient information”.</p><elsevierMultimedia ident="tbl0005"></elsevierMultimedia></li></ul></p><p id="par0030" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">The analysis of results was performed comparing the rate of favorable choice for RRR presentations <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs</span>. ARR and NNT. The study hypothesis postulated that respondent cardiologists would choose more easily RRR rather than ARR or NNT as evidence favoring a treatment. Moreover, questions from groups 1 and 2 were conjointly analyzed. Thus, the total number of answers was 812 (406 respondents with 2 questions each) in the case of ARR, 812 (406 respondents with 2 questions each) in the case of RRR and 1218 (406 respondents with 3 questions each) in the case of NNT and RRR<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>+<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>NNT (2 questions in group 1 and one question in group 2).</p><p id="par0035" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">Groups were compared using <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">χ</span><span class="elsevierStyleSup">2</span>. The odds ratio logarithm (log-OR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI<span class="elsevierStyleInf">95%</span>) was calculated to compare the study results with those previously published with the same format.</p></span><span id="sec0015" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0075">Results</span><p id="par0040" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall"><a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#fig0005">Fig. 1</a> shows the participating countries and the proportion of respondent cardiologists is compared to the total number of cardiologists in each country, except for Brazil, as the proportion of Spanish speaking physicians is negligible in this country. The same graph shows the proportional distribution of cardiologists in the region.</p><elsevierMultimedia ident="fig0005"></elsevierMultimedia><p id="par0045" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">In the conjoint analysis of group 1 and 2 questions, 62.2% (505/812) of the respondents accepted the proposals as valid when the data were presented as RRR, whereas only 40.4% (328/812) accepted it when the results were presented as ARR. On the other hand, 44.4% (541/1218) cardiologists validated the proposals when the data were expressed as NNT (<span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000). The comparison between answers when the propositions were made with RRR and ARR was log-OR<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.89, CI<span class="elsevierStyleInf">95%</span> 0.683–1.092, <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000, and the comparison of NNT <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> ARR was log-OR<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.17, CI<span class="elsevierStyleInf">95%</span> −0.020 to 0.351, <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.073, indicating that the respondent cardiologists managed the statistical evidence in the same manner both with ARR as with its equivalent NNT. Finally, the comparison between RRR and NNT was log-OR<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.72, CI<span class="elsevierStyleInf">95%</span> 0.536–0.908, <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000. In group 3, where questions were presented with biased bar charts, 61.6% (250/406) cardiologists accepted as recommendable the proposed screening method when the data were presented in the first place as RRR; however, when the same problem was presented as ARR, only 14.0% (57/406) cardiologists accepted the method as useful (log-OR<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>2.28, CI<span class="elsevierStyleInf">95%</span> 1.926–2.643, <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000) (<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#fig0010">Fig. 2</a>).</p><elsevierMultimedia ident="fig0010"></elsevierMultimedia></span><span id="sec0020" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0080">Discussion</span><p id="par0050" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">Studies on cognitive psychology demonstrate that the possible interpretation of quantitative evidence is deeply affected by the way in which it is presented.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0040"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">8,9</span></a> Thus, the interpretation of numerical information may differ depending on the data presentation format. For example, a 25% RRR can be generated both from the difference in event rates between two groups of 40% and 30% as well as from the difference between two groups of 3% and 4%; which in the first case represents an absolute difference of 10% and in the second case only 1%. If the data were only presented as RRR, the tendency would be to accept these differences as having clinical relevance, neglecting or ignoring the real event rate reduction. Although medical journals require in general the publication of the real event rates in terms of ARR and/or NNT, there is no uniform policy in the presentation of clinical study results, either among researchers or in the pharmaceutical industry marketing.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0030"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">6,10</span></a> The “illusion of benefit” produced when results are presented as RRR has strong implications in the acceptance and adoption of innovations. In our work, although the respondents must already be trained to identify different measurement presentations of effect magnitude, faults were found in the interpretations of the results. When the benefits were presented in terms of RRR, more than 60% cardiologists accepted as valid evidence which should have been rejected or at least questioned. This percentage was significantly reduced both in the presentation of data as ARR or NNT. Graphics intentionally biased, generated even more significant confusion in the study. The magnification of relative proportions in the bar graphs was easily confused with real data difference.</p><p id="par0055" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">It is essential to train students and physicians in the quantitative analysis of statistical techniques in order to correct these issues and improve decision-taking. The results of other studies as well as ours, demonstrate that the current learning process of these methods is apparently inadequate and unsatisfactory.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0055"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">11–13</span></a> The meta-analysis performed by Covey<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0025"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">5</span></a> concluded that physicians as well as students and public in general may be equally influenced by the manner in which results are presented; in other words, medical training and clinical experience are not enough to immunize subjects against the tendency to interpret data differently when it is presented in terms of RRR, ARR or NNT. This difficulty to acquire the adequate knowledge in mathematics and statistics to interpret health decision making has been thoroughly studied under the name of <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">numeracy</span>.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0070"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">14,15</span></a> The importance of this concept is based on the fact that the training and comprehension of statistical tools might not be within the reach of many health-care decision takers, and particularly the patients who might wish to make their own health decisions.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0080"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">16</span></a></p><p id="par0060" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">Fourteen former studies analyzing the effects of presenting treatment benefits or therapeutic risks in different formats to physicians belonging to several fields of medicine, have reported a wide dispersion in the results.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0020"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">4–6,17–27</span></a> Grouped together, the weighted log-OR was 1.19 when comparing RRR <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> ARR and 1.08 in the comparison of RRR <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> NNT, which would indicate a higher tendency to accept a result as valid when it is presented in terms of relative risk. Although these overall findings differ slightly from those observed in our work, there were minimal differences when the individual results of Lacy<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0090"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">18</span></a> and Ward<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0115"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">23</span></a> for RRR <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs</span>. ARR and of Bucher,<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0100"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">20</span></a> Nikolajevic<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0110"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">22</span></a> and Nexoe<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0125"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">25,26</span></a> for RRR <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> NNT were considered. Specifically, in a study performed by cardiologists in Spain, Brotons et al.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRef" href="#bib0120"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">24</span></a> reported that presenting clinical trials results in the form of RRR, as compared with presenting results in terms of ARR or NNT, led to overestimation of the efficacy of interventions, without influencing the likelihood of prescribing a given drug therapy.</p></span><span id="sec0025" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0085">Conclusions</span><p id="par0065" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">The assessment of a Latin-American sample of cardiologists showed a different decision-taking in the comparison of the therapeutic benefits observed in a series of clinical trials when the presentation was done in terms of relative risks instead of absolute risks. There was a tendency to favor outcomes when the data was presented as RRR. The inclusion of biased graphics was also interpreted as real data difference. This study demonstrated the risk of statistical data misinterpretation and the need to improve cardiologists’ training in quantitative techniques, in order to ameliorate the care decision-making process.</p></span><span id="sec0030" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0090">Funding</span><p id="par0070" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">No endorsement of any kind received to conduct this study/article.</p></span><span id="sec0035" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0095">Conflict of interest</span><p id="par0075" class="elsevierStylePara elsevierViewall">The authors declare no conflict of interest.</p></span></span>" "textoCompletoSecciones" => array:1 [ "secciones" => array:12 [ 0 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "xres439754" "titulo" => "Abstract" "secciones" => array:4 [ 0 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0005" "titulo" => "Objective" ] 1 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0010" "titulo" => "Methods" ] 2 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0015" "titulo" => "Results" ] 3 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0020" "titulo" => "Conclusions" ] ] ] 1 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "xpalclavsec462824" "titulo" => "Keywords" ] 2 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "xres439753" "titulo" => "Resumen" "secciones" => array:4 [ 0 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0025" "titulo" => "Objetivo" ] 1 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0030" "titulo" => "Métodos" ] 2 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0035" "titulo" => "Resultados" ] 3 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0040" "titulo" => "Conclusiones" ] ] ] 3 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "xpalclavsec462825" "titulo" => "Palabras clave" ] 4 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "sec0005" "titulo" => "Introduction" ] 5 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "sec0010" "titulo" => "Methods" ] 6 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "sec0015" "titulo" => "Results" ] 7 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "sec0020" "titulo" => "Discussion" ] 8 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "sec0025" "titulo" => "Conclusions" ] 9 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "sec0030" "titulo" => "Funding" ] 10 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "sec0035" "titulo" => "Conflict of interest" ] 11 => array:1 [ "titulo" => "References" ] ] ] "pdfFichero" => "main.pdf" "tienePdf" => true "fechaRecibido" => "2013-07-22" "fechaAceptado" => "2014-09-02" "PalabrasClave" => array:2 [ "en" => array:1 [ 0 => array:4 [ "clase" => "keyword" "titulo" => "Keywords" "identificador" => "xpalclavsec462824" "palabras" => array:6 [ 0 => "Biostatistics" 1 => "Risks" 2 => "Decision-taking" 3 => "Cardiology" 4 => "Latin America" 5 => "Argentina" ] ] ] "es" => array:1 [ 0 => array:4 [ "clase" => "keyword" "titulo" => "Palabras clave" "identificador" => "xpalclavsec462825" "palabras" => array:6 [ 0 => "Bioestadística" 1 => "Riesgos" 2 => "Toma de decisión" 3 => "Cardiología" 4 => "América Latina" 5 => "Argentina" ] ] ] ] "tieneResumen" => true "resumen" => array:2 [ "en" => array:3 [ "titulo" => "Abstract" "resumen" => "<span id="abst0005" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0010">Objective</span><p id="spar0005" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Previous publications demonstrated that the presentation of treatment benefits in terms of relative risk reduction (RRR) rather than in terms of absolute risk reduction (ARR) or number of patients to treat (NNT) might favor the perception of outcome effectiveness. The objective was to perform a cognitive evaluation to assess how the manner in which risks and benefits of screening methods and treatments are presented can affect medical care decision-taking in a sample of cardiologists.</p></span> <span id="abst0010" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0015">Methods</span><p id="spar0010" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Four-hundred and six Latin American cardiologists answered a questionnaire reporting the results of clinical trials presented as RRR, ARR or NNT, associated or not to biased graphs.</p></span> <span id="abst0015" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0020">Results</span><p id="spar0015" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Cardiologists’ decision-taking was different when comparing treatment benefits presented as RRR (62.2%) <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> ARR (40.4%) (<span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000), and as RRR <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> NNT (44.4%) (<span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000). However, their decision-taking was similar when information was presented as NNT or ARR (<span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.073). The inclusion of biased graphs was misinterpreted as an actual data difference (RRR: 61.6% <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> ARR: 14.0%, <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">p</span><span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000).</p></span> <span id="abst0020" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0025">Conclusions</span><p id="spar0020" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">This study demonstrated that Latin American cardiologists could misinterpret statistical data when information of clinical trials is presented in terms of RRR. We emphasize the need to enhance cardiologists’ training in quantitative techniques, to improve medical care decision-making.</p></span>" "secciones" => array:4 [ 0 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0005" "titulo" => "Objective" ] 1 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0010" "titulo" => "Methods" ] 2 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0015" "titulo" => "Results" ] 3 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0020" "titulo" => "Conclusions" ] ] ] "es" => array:3 [ "titulo" => "Resumen" "resumen" => "<span id="abst0025" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0035">Objetivo</span><p id="spar0025" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Publicaciones previas demostraron que la presentación de los beneficios terapéuticos en términos de reducción del riesgo relativo (RRR) en lugar de en términos de reducción del riesgo absoluto (RRA) o número necesario a tratar (NNT) favorecería la percepción de que los resultados son más efectivos. El objetivo fue realizar una evaluación en una muestra de cardiólogos para determinar cómo afecta a la decisión médica la manera como se presentan los riesgos y beneficios de métodos diagnósticos y terapéuticos.</p></span> <span id="abst0030" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0040">Métodos</span><p id="spar0030" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Cuatrocientos seis cardiólogos latinoamericanos respondieron a un cuestionario que contenía los resultados de ensayos clínicos como RRR, RRA y/o NNT, asociados o no a gráficos sesgados.</p></span> <span id="abst0035" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0045">Resultados</span><p id="spar0035" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">La toma de decisión de los cardiólogos fue diferente al comparar los beneficios terapéuticos presentados como RRR (62.2%) vs. RRA (40.4%) (p<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000), y como RRR vs. NNT (44.4%) (p<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000); sin embargo, fue similar cuando la información se presentó como NNT o RRA (p<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.073). La inclusión de gráficos sesgados fue malinterpretada como una diferencia real (RRR: 61.6% vs. RRA: 14.0%, p<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>=<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>0.000000).</p></span> <span id="abst0040" class="elsevierStyleSection elsevierViewall"><span class="elsevierStyleSectionTitle" id="sect0050">Conclusiones</span><p id="spar0040" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Se demostró que los cardiólogos latinoamericanos podrían confundir resultados estadísticos cuando la información de los ensayos clínicos se presenta como RRR. Hacemos hincapié en la necesidad de entrenar a los cardiólogos en las técnicas cuantitativas para mejorar la toma de decisiones.</p></span>" "secciones" => array:4 [ 0 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0025" "titulo" => "Objetivo" ] 1 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0030" "titulo" => "Métodos" ] 2 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0035" "titulo" => "Resultados" ] 3 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "abst0040" "titulo" => "Conclusiones" ] ] ] ] "multimedia" => array:3 [ 0 => array:7 [ "identificador" => "fig0005" "etiqueta" => "Figure 1" "tipo" => "MULTIMEDIAFIGURA" "mostrarFloat" => true "mostrarDisplay" => false "figura" => array:1 [ 0 => array:4 [ "imagen" => "gr1.jpeg" "Alto" => 1396 "Ancho" => 1664 "Tamanyo" => 118897 ] ] "descripcion" => array:1 [ "en" => "<p id="spar0045" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Relative distribution of countries participating in the survey, compared with the proportion of cardiologists in the region (except Brazil).</p>" ] ] 1 => array:7 [ "identificador" => "fig0010" "etiqueta" => "Figure 2" "tipo" => "MULTIMEDIAFIGURA" "mostrarFloat" => true "mostrarDisplay" => false "figura" => array:1 [ 0 => array:4 [ "imagen" => "gr2.jpeg" "Alto" => 958 "Ancho" => 1667 "Tamanyo" => 81335 ] ] "descripcion" => array:1 [ "en" => "<p id="spar0055" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Analysis of results for each type of comparison according to the log-odds ratios and its 95% confidence interval.</p>" ] ] 2 => array:7 [ "identificador" => "tbl0005" "etiqueta" => "Table 1" "tipo" => "MULTIMEDIATABLA" "mostrarFloat" => true "mostrarDisplay" => false "tabla" => array:1 [ "tablatextoimagen" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "tabla" => array:1 [ 0 => """ <table border="0" frame="\n \t\t\t\t\tvoid\n \t\t\t\t" class=""><thead title="thead"><tr title="table-row"><th class="td" title="table-head " align="left" valign="top" scope="col" style="border-bottom: 2px solid black">Absolute risk reduction (ARR) \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</th><th class="td" title="table-head " align="left" valign="top" scope="col" style="border-bottom: 2px solid black">Relative risk reduction (RRR) \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</th><th class="td" title="table-head " align="left" valign="top" scope="col" style="border-bottom: 2px solid black">Number needed to treat (NNT) \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</th><th class="td" title="table-head " align="left" valign="top" scope="col" style="border-bottom: 2px solid black">NNT<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>+<span class="elsevierStyleHsp" style=""></span>RRR \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</th></tr></thead><tbody title="tbody"><tr title="table-row"><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G1. In a controlled clinical trial, 1900 men receiving a drug to lower their cholesterol level were compared with 1906 men receiving placebo. After 7 years of follow-up, the rate of cardiovascular death was 2% for the placebo group and 1.6% for the group receiving the drug, representing an absolute risk reduction of 0.4% (statistically significant). \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G1. A controlled clinical trial of almost 4.000 men with hypercholesterolemia, treated with a drug or placebo revealed a relative risk reduction of 20% in cardiovascular death rate over 7 years. This difference in favor of the drug was statistically significant. \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G1. In a controlled clinical trial, 3806 patients were divided into two groups to compare a drug <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> placebo. The rate of cardiovascular death evidenced a statistically significant difference favoring the drug, with 250 patients who needed to be treated to prevent one death over 7 years. \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G1. Approximately 4000 persons participated in a controlled clinical study to evaluate a drug <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> placebo in hypercholesterolemia. Results over 7 years favored drug treatment, with a relative decrease in the rate of cardiovascular death of 20% (statistically significant), and 250 patients who needed to be treated to avoid one event. \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td></tr><tr title="table-row"><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G2. A medical intervention resulted in 1.4% absolute reduction in the 5-year incidence of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction (2.5% <span class="elsevierStyleItalic">vs.</span> 3.9%) (the study was a controlled clinical trial and the difference was statistically significant). \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G2. A medical intervention reported 36% relative risk reduction of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction over 5 years (it was a controlled clinical trial and the difference was statistically significant). \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G2. A certain medical intervention requires treating 72 persons during 5 years to prevent one fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction (the study was a controlled clinical trial and the difference was statistically significant). \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="" valign="top"> \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td></tr><tr title="table-row"><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G3. The use of a certain non-invasive diagnostic method for population screening provided the following survival results<span class="elsevierStyleInlineFigure"><elsevierMultimedia class="elsevierStyleLink" ident="fx1"></elsevierMultimedia></span> \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="left" valign="top">G3. The implementation of a certain non-invasive diagnostic method to screen a population gave the following mortality results in late follow-up<span class="elsevierStyleInlineFigure"><elsevierMultimedia class="elsevierStyleLink" ident="fx2"></elsevierMultimedia></span> \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="" valign="top"> \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td><td class="td" title="table-entry " align="" valign="top"> \t\t\t\t\t\t\n \t\t\t\t</td></tr></tbody></table> """ ] "imagenFichero" => array:1 [ 0 => "xTab686275.png" ] ] ] ] "descripcion" => array:1 [ "en" => "<p id="spar0050" class="elsevierStyleSimplePara elsevierViewall">Exact wording of questions.<a class="elsevierStyleCrossRefs" href="#bib0020"><span class="elsevierStyleSup">4,6,7</span></a></p>" ] ] ] "bibliografia" => array:2 [ "titulo" => "References" "seccion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "identificador" => "bibs0005" "bibliografiaReferencia" => array:27 [ 0 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0005" "etiqueta" => "1" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "P. McGettigan" 1 => "K. Sly" 2 => "D. O’Connell" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "J Gen Intern Med" "fecha" => "1999" "volumen" => "14" "paginaInicial" => "633" "paginaFinal" => "642" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10571710" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 1 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0010" "etiqueta" => "2" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Presenting risk information: a review of the effects of “framing” and others manipulations on patients outcomes" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "A. Edwards" 1 => "G. Elwyn" 2 => "J. Covey" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "doi" => "10.1080/10810730150501413" "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "J Health Commun" "fecha" => "2001" "volumen" => "6" "paginaInicial" => "61" "paginaFinal" => "82" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11317424" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 2 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0015" "etiqueta" => "3" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Describing treatment effects to patients: how they are expressed makes a difference" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "A. Moxey" 1 => "D. O’Connell" 2 => "P. McGettigan" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "J Gen Intern Med" "fecha" => "2003" "volumen" => "18" "paginaInicial" => "948" "paginaFinal" => "959" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14687282" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 3 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0020" "etiqueta" => "4" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Absolutely relative: how research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "L. Forrow" 1 => "W.C. Taylor" 2 => "R.M. Arnold" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Am J Med" "fecha" => "1992" "volumen" => "92" "paginaInicial" => "121" "paginaFinal" => "124" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1543193" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 4 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0025" "etiqueta" => "5" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "A meta-analysis of the effects of presenting treatment benefits in different formats" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => "J. Covey" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "doi" => "10.1177/0272989X07306783" "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Med Decis Making" "fecha" => "2007" "volumen" => "27" "paginaInicial" => "638" "paginaFinal" => "654" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17873250" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 5 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0030" "etiqueta" => "6" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Measured enthusiasm: does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness?" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "C.D. Naylor" 1 => "E. Chen" 2 => "B. Strauss" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Ann Intern Med" "fecha" => "1992" "volumen" => "117" "paginaInicial" => "916" "paginaFinal" => "921" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1443954" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 6 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0035" "etiqueta" => "7" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Does informed consent alter elderly patients’ preferences for colorectal cancer screening? Results of a randomized trial" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:2 [ 0 => "A.M.D. Wolf" 1 => "J.B. Schorling" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "J Gen Intern Med" "fecha" => "2000" "volumen" => "15" "paginaInicial" => "24" "paginaFinal" => "30" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10632830" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 7 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0040" "etiqueta" => "8" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "The framing of decisions and the rationality of choice" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:2 [ 0 => "A. Tversky" 1 => "D. Kahneman" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Science" "fecha" => "1981" "volumen" => "211" "paginaInicial" => "453" "paginaFinal" => "458" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7455683" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 8 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0045" "etiqueta" => "9" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Choices, values, and frames" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:2 [ 0 => "D. Kahneman" 1 => "A. Tversky" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:5 [ "tituloSerie" => "Am Psychol" "fecha" => "1984" "volumen" => "39" "paginaInicial" => "341" "paginaFinal" => "350" ] ] ] ] ] ] 9 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0050" "etiqueta" => "10" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Reporting of numerical and statistical differences in abstracts: improving but not optimal" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:2 [ 0 => "E. Dryver" 1 => "J.E. Hux" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "J Gen Intern Med" "fecha" => "2002" "volumen" => "17" "paginaInicial" => "203" "paginaFinal" => "206" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11929506" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 10 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0055" "etiqueta" => "11" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Press releases: translating research into news" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:2 [ 0 => "S. Woloshin" 1 => "L.M. Schwartz" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "JAMA" "fecha" => "2002" "volumen" => "287" "paginaInicial" => "2856" "paginaFinal" => "2858" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12038933" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 11 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0060" "etiqueta" => "12" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Coverage of the news media of the benefits and risks of medications" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "R.L. Moynihan" 1 => "L. Bero" 2 => "R. Ross-Degnan" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "doi" => "10.1056/NEJM200006013422206" "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "N Engl J Med" "fecha" => "2000" "volumen" => "342" "paginaInicial" => "1645" "paginaFinal" => "1650" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10833211" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 12 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0065" "etiqueta" => "13" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Risk communication in the clinical consultation" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "R. Thomson" 1 => "A. Edwards" 2 => "J. Grey" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Clin Med" "fecha" => "2005" "volumen" => "5" "paginaInicial" => "465" "paginaFinal" => "469" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16268328" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 13 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0070" "etiqueta" => "14" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Clinical implications of numeracy: theory and practice" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "W. Nelson" 1 => "V.F. Reyna" 2 => "A. Fagerlin" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "doi" => "10.1007/s12160-008-9037-8" "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Ann Behav Med" "fecha" => "2008" "volumen" => "35" "paginaInicial" => "261" "paginaFinal" => "274" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18677452" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 14 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0075" "etiqueta" => "15" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Statistics can affect treatment decisions" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => "J. Lexchin" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Can Fam Physician" "fecha" => "2003" "volumen" => "49" "paginaInicial" => "1587" "paginaFinal" => "1588" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14708916" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 15 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0080" "etiqueta" => "16" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "V.F. Reyna" 1 => "W.L. Nelson" 2 => "P.K. Han" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "doi" => "10.1037/a0017327" "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Psychol Bull" "fecha" => "2009" "volumen" => "135" "paginaInicial" => "943" "paginaFinal" => "973" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19883143" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 16 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0085" "etiqueta" => "17" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Do doctors Judie therapy results differently from students?" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:2 [ 0 => "C. Damur" 1 => "J. Steurer" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Schweizerische Medizinische Wochenschrift" "fecha" => "2000" "volumen" => "130" "paginaInicial" => "171" "paginaFinal" => "176" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10719717" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 17 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0090" "etiqueta" => "18" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Impact of presentation of research results on likelihood of prescribing medications to patients with left ventricular dysfunction" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "C.R. Lacy" 1 => "J.A. Barone" 2 => "D.C. Suh" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Am J Cardiol" "fecha" => "2001" "volumen" => "87" "paginaInicial" => "203" "paginaFinal" => "207" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11152840" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 18 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0095" "etiqueta" => "19" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Completeness of reporting trial results: effect on physicians’ willingness to prescribe" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "M. Bobbio" 1 => "B. Demichelis" 2 => "G. Giustetto" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Lancet" "fecha" => "1994" "volumen" => "343" "paginaInicial" => "1209" "paginaFinal" => "1211" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7909875" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 19 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0100" "etiqueta" => "20" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentration" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "H.C. Bucher" 1 => "M. Weinbacher" 2 => "K. Gyr" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:5 [ "tituloSerie" => "Br Med J" "fecha" => "1994" "volumen" => "309" "paginaInicial" => "761" "paginaFinal" => "764" ] ] ] ] ] ] 20 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0105" "etiqueta" => "21" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Same information, different decisions: the influence of evidence on the management of hypertension in the elderly" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:2 [ 0 => "M. Cranney" 1 => "T. Walley" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Br J Gen Pract" "fecha" => "1996" "volumen" => "46" "paginaInicial" => "661" "paginaFinal" => "663" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8978112" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 21 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0110" "etiqueta" => "22" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Effects of information framing on the intention of family physicians to prescribe long-term hormone replacement therapy" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "J. Nikolajevic-Sarunac" 1 => "D.A. Henry" 2 => "D.L. O’Connell" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "J Gen Intern Med" "fecha" => "1999" "volumen" => "14" "paginaInicial" => "591" "paginaFinal" => "598" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10571703" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 22 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0115" "etiqueta" => "23" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Resource allocation in cardiac rehabilitation: Muir Gray's aphorisms might apply in Australia" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => false "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "J.E. Ward" 1 => "S. Shah" 2 => "N. Donnelly" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:5 [ "tituloSerie" => "Clin Manag" "fecha" => "1999" "volumen" => "8" "paginaInicial" => "24" "paginaFinal" => "25" ] ] ] ] ] ] 23 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0120" "etiqueta" => "24" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Methods of reporting research results and their influence on decision-making by cardiologists prescribing drugs for primary and secondary prevention" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "C. Brotons" 1 => "I. Moral" 2 => "A. Ribera" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Rev Esp Cardiol" "fecha" => "2002" "volumen" => "55" "paginaInicial" => "1042" "paginaFinal" => "1051" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12383389" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 24 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0125" "etiqueta" => "25" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Danish GPs’ perception of disease risk and benefit of prevention" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "J. Nexoe" 1 => "D. Gyrd-Hansen" 2 => "J. Kragstrup" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Fam Pract" "fecha" => "2002" "volumen" => "19" "paginaInicial" => "3" "paginaFinal" => "6" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11818342" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 25 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0130" "etiqueta" => "26" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Perception of risk information: similarities and differences between Danish and Polish general practitioners" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "J. Nexoe" 1 => "A.M. Oltarzewska" 2 => "J. Sawicka-Powierza" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Scand J Prim Health Care" "fecha" => "2002" "volumen" => "20" "paginaInicial" => "183" "paginaFinal" => "187" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12389758" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] 26 => array:3 [ "identificador" => "bib0135" "etiqueta" => "27" "referencia" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "contribucion" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "titulo" => "GPs’ and physicians’ interpretation of risks, benefits and diagnostic test results" "autores" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "etal" => true "autores" => array:3 [ 0 => "R.F. Heller" 1 => "J.E. Sandars" 2 => "L. Patterson" ] ] ] ] ] "host" => array:1 [ 0 => array:1 [ "Revista" => array:6 [ "tituloSerie" => "Fam Pract" "fecha" => "2004" "volumen" => "21" "paginaInicial" => "155" "paginaFinal" => "159" "link" => array:1 [ 0 => array:2 [ "url" => "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15020384" "web" => "Medline" ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] ] "idiomaDefecto" => "en" "url" => "/14059940/0000008500000001/v2_201502270429/S1405994014001633/v2_201502270429/en/main.assets" "Apartado" => array:4 [ "identificador" => "9822" "tipo" => "SECCION" "es" => array:2 [ "titulo" => "Investigaciones clínicas" "idiomaDefecto" => true ] "idiomaDefecto" => "es" ] "PDF" => "https://static.elsevier.es/multimedia/14059940/0000008500000001/v2_201502270429/S1405994014001633/v2_201502270429/en/main.pdf?idApp=UINPBA00004N&text.app=https://www.elsevier.es/" "EPUB" => "https://multimedia.elsevier.es/PublicationsMultimediaV1/item/epub/S1405994014001633?idApp=UINPBA00004N" ]
| Year/Month | Html | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 November | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| 2024 October | 28 | 6 | 34 |
| 2024 September | 66 | 5 | 71 |
| 2024 August | 45 | 2 | 47 |
| 2024 July | 29 | 5 | 34 |
| 2024 June | 30 | 5 | 35 |
| 2024 May | 12 | 1 | 13 |
| 2024 April | 26 | 5 | 31 |
| 2024 March | 43 | 4 | 47 |
| 2024 February | 28 | 7 | 35 |
| 2024 January | 31 | 7 | 38 |
| 2023 December | 28 | 4 | 32 |
| 2023 November | 33 | 8 | 41 |
| 2023 October | 35 | 5 | 40 |
| 2023 September | 22 | 6 | 28 |
| 2023 August | 11 | 4 | 15 |
| 2023 July | 30 | 4 | 34 |
| 2023 June | 59 | 6 | 65 |
| 2023 May | 62 | 2 | 64 |
| 2023 April | 34 | 2 | 36 |
| 2023 March | 38 | 0 | 38 |
| 2023 February | 49 | 3 | 52 |
| 2023 January | 41 | 5 | 46 |
| 2022 December | 61 | 4 | 65 |
| 2022 November | 66 | 7 | 73 |
| 2022 October | 64 | 15 | 79 |
| 2022 September | 85 | 7 | 92 |
| 2022 August | 46 | 9 | 55 |
| 2022 July | 32 | 8 | 40 |
| 2022 June | 49 | 6 | 55 |
| 2022 May | 57 | 7 | 64 |
| 2022 April | 69 | 3 | 72 |
| 2022 March | 115 | 5 | 120 |
| 2022 February | 126 | 8 | 134 |
| 2022 January | 135 | 7 | 142 |
| 2021 December | 66 | 22 | 88 |
| 2021 November | 99 | 12 | 111 |
| 2021 October | 130 | 16 | 146 |
| 2021 September | 65 | 14 | 79 |
| 2021 August | 96 | 7 | 103 |
| 2021 July | 36 | 7 | 43 |
| 2021 June | 34 | 6 | 40 |
| 2021 May | 61 | 9 | 70 |
| 2021 April | 96 | 9 | 105 |
| 2021 March | 39 | 15 | 54 |
| 2021 February | 41 | 8 | 49 |
| 2021 January | 39 | 8 | 47 |
| 2020 December | 30 | 8 | 38 |
| 2020 November | 22 | 8 | 30 |
| 2020 October | 28 | 8 | 36 |
| 2020 September | 24 | 6 | 30 |
| 2020 August | 24 | 9 | 33 |
| 2020 July | 24 | 10 | 34 |
| 2020 June | 8 | 9 | 17 |
| 2020 May | 21 | 6 | 27 |
| 2020 April | 19 | 7 | 26 |
| 2020 March | 24 | 4 | 28 |
| 2020 February | 17 | 5 | 22 |
| 2020 January | 21 | 4 | 25 |
| 2019 December | 44 | 7 | 51 |
| 2019 November | 19 | 8 | 27 |
| 2019 October | 15 | 3 | 18 |
| 2019 September | 15 | 7 | 22 |
| 2019 August | 16 | 1 | 17 |
| 2019 July | 33 | 5 | 38 |
| 2019 June | 31 | 7 | 38 |
| 2019 May | 131 | 9 | 140 |
| 2019 April | 56 | 15 | 71 |
| 2019 March | 4 | 3 | 7 |
| 2019 February | 8 | 2 | 10 |
| 2019 January | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| 2018 December | 8 | 3 | 11 |
| 2018 November | 13 | 4 | 17 |
| 2018 October | 10 | 11 | 21 |
| 2018 September | 7 | 1 | 8 |
| 2018 August | 14 | 8 | 22 |
| 2018 July | 8 | 1 | 9 |
| 2018 June | 4 | 2 | 6 |
| 2018 May | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| 2018 April | 5 | 1 | 6 |
| 2018 March | 4 | 0 | 4 |
| 2018 February | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| 2018 January | 6 | 2 | 8 |
| 2017 December | 12 | 0 | 12 |
| 2017 November | 11 | 1 | 12 |
| 2017 October | 13 | 2 | 15 |
| 2017 September | 8 | 1 | 9 |
| 2017 August | 11 | 3 | 14 |
| 2017 July | 11 | 2 | 13 |
| 2017 June | 10 | 9 | 19 |
| 2017 May | 16 | 4 | 20 |
| 2017 April | 17 | 5 | 22 |
| 2017 March | 12 | 32 | 44 |
| 2017 February | 23 | 4 | 27 |
| 2017 January | 25 | 2 | 27 |
| 2016 December | 39 | 10 | 49 |
| 2016 November | 39 | 6 | 45 |
| 2016 October | 51 | 7 | 58 |
| 2016 September | 48 | 7 | 55 |
| 2016 August | 35 | 5 | 40 |
| 2016 July | 20 | 1 | 21 |
| 2016 June | 20 | 4 | 24 |
| 2016 May | 23 | 19 | 42 |
| 2016 April | 29 | 5 | 34 |
| 2016 March | 27 | 6 | 33 |
| 2016 February | 25 | 10 | 35 |
| 2016 January | 24 | 6 | 30 |
| 2015 December | 22 | 8 | 30 |
| 2015 November | 25 | 4 | 29 |
| 2015 October | 24 | 9 | 33 |
| 2015 September | 28 | 8 | 36 |
| 2015 August | 22 | 9 | 31 |
| 2015 July | 15 | 3 | 18 |
| 2015 June | 22 | 5 | 27 |
| 2015 May | 90 | 45 | 135 |
| 2015 April | 42 | 27 | 69 |
| 2015 March | 39 | 31 | 70 |
Show all