Risk literacy assessment of general practitioners and medical students using the Berlin Numeracy Test
| Autor: | Jan C. Becker, Bernhard Marschall, Hendrik Friederichs, Roman Birkenstein, Anne Weissenstein |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Adult
Male Medical education medicine.medical_specialty Students Medical media_common.quotation_subject education Predictive value Risk literacy Breast Neoplasms Health benefits Risk Assessment Literacy 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Numeracy General Practitioners Predictive Value of Tests Germany medicine Humans 030212 general & internal medicine Mass screening Early Detection of Cancer media_common lcsh:R5-920 business.industry 030503 health policy & services Numerical Analysis Computer-Assisted Middle Aged Confidence interval Test (assessment) Family medicine Data Interpretation Statistical Global Positioning System Female Information Literacy 0305 other medical science Family Practice business lcsh:Medicine (General) Needs Assessment Mammography Research Article |
| Zdroj: | BMC Family Practice BMC Family Practice, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2020) |
| Popis: | Background The responsibility for helping patients understand potential health benefits and risks, especially regarding screening tests, falls largely to general practitioners (GPs). The Berlin Numeracy Test (BNT) specifically measures risk literacy (i.e., the ability to understand different aspects of statistical numeracy associated with accurate interpretation of information about risks). This study explored the association between risk literacy levels and clinical experience in GPs vs. medical students. Additionally, the effect of GP risk literacy on evaluation of the predictive value of screening tests was examined. Methods The participants were 84 GPs and 92 third-year medical students who completed the BNT (total score range 0–4 points). The GPs received an additional case scenario on mammography screening as a simple measure of performance in applying numeracy skills. Results Despite having an average of 25.9 years of clinical experience, GPs scored no better than medical students on risk literacy (GPs: 2.33 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08–2.59; students: 2.34, 95% CI 2.07–2.61; P = .983). Of all GPs, 71.6% (n = 58) greatly overestimated the real predictive value. Conclusions In this study, we found no difference in risk literacy between current students and current GPs. GPs lack risk literacy and consequently do not fully understand numeric estimates of probability in routine screening procedures. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|