IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v21y2001i1p60-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Inclusion of Patient Testimonials in Decision Aids

Author

Listed:
  • Peter A. Ubel

    (Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine)

  • Christopher Jepson

    (Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine)

  • Jonathan Baron

    (Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania)

Abstract

Background . Decision aids often provide statistical information and patient testimonials to guide treatment choices. This raises the possibility that the testimonials will overwhelm the statistical information. Methods . Prospective jurors in Philadelphia County were presented with hypothetical statistical information about the percentage of angina patients who benefit from angioplasty and bypass surgery (50% and 75%, respectively). They were also given written testimonials from hypothetical patients who had benefited or not benefited from each of the two treatments. The numbers of patients benefiting and not benefiting were varied to be either proportionate to the statistical information or disproportionate. In study 1, all participants received 1 testimonial from a patient who had benefited from angioplasty and 1 from a patient who had not. Participants receiving the proportionate questionnaire version were also given 3 testimonials from patients who benefited from bypass surgery and 1 from a patient who did not, coinciding with the hypothetical statistical information. In contrast, participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version received only 1 testimonial from a patient who benefited from surgery and 1 from a patient who did not. In study 2, all participants received 2 examples of patients who benefited from angioplasty and 2 who did not. Participants with the proportionate questionnaire version received the same testimonials regarding surgery as in study 1. Those receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version received 2 testimonials from patients who benefited from bypass and 2 from patients who did not. Finally, a separate set of participants in study 2 received a questionnaire with no testimonials. Results . In study 1, 30% of participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version chose bypass surgery versus 44% of those receiving the proportionate questionnaire (P = 0.002 by X 2 ). In study 2, 34% of participants receiving the disproportionate questionnaire version chose bypass surgery versus 37% of those receiving the proportionate questionnaire (P= 0.59 by X 2 ). Of those receiving no patient testimonials, 58% chose bypass surgery. Conclusions . The inclusion of written patient testimonials significantly influenced hypothetical treatment choices. Efforts to make the mix of positive versus negative testimonials proportionate to statistical information may, under some circumstances, affect choices in ways that cannot automatically be assumed to be optimal.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter A. Ubel & Christopher Jepson & Jonathan Baron, 2001. "The Inclusion of Patient Testimonials in Decision Aids," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 21(1), pages 60-68, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:21:y:2001:i:1:p:60-68
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0102100108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0102100108
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X0102100108?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pieterse, Arwen H. & de Vries, Marieke & Kunneman, Marleen & Stiggelbout, Anne M. & Feldman-Stewart, Deb, 2013. "Theory-informed design of values clarification methods: A cognitive psychological perspective on patient health-related decision making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 156-163.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:3:p:241-264 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:1:y:2006:i::p:64-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Bertoli, Paola & Grembi, Veronica & Morelli, Massimo & Rosso, Anna Cecilia, 2023. "In medio stat virtus? Effective communication and preferences for redistribution in hard times," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 214(C), pages 105-147.
    5. Jennifer Amsterlaw & Brian Zikmund-Fisher & Angela Fagerlin & Peter A. Ubel, 2006. "Can avoidance of complications lead to biased healthcare decisions?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 64-75, July.
    6. Niels Haase & Frank Renkewitz & Cornelia Betsch, 2013. "The Measurement of Subjective Probability: Evaluating the Sensitivity and Accuracy of Various Scales," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(10), pages 1812-1828, October.
    7. Braverman, Jennifer A. & Blumenthal-Barby, J.S., 2012. "Assessment of the sunk-cost effect in clinical decision-making," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 186-192.
    8. Carminati, Lara, 2020. "Behavioural Economics and Human Decision Making: Instances from the Health Care System," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(6), pages 659-664.
    9. Jennifer Apolinário-Hagen & Mathias Harrer & Melina Dederichs & Lara Fritsche & Jeannette Wopperer & Frank Wals & Adrian Loerbroks & Dirk Lehr & Christel Salewski & Peter Angerer & David Daniel Ebert, 2021. "Exploring the influence of testimonial source on attitudes towards e-mental health interventions among university students: Four-group randomized controlled trial," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-24, May.
    10. Winterbottom, Anna & Bekker, Hilary L. & Conner, Mark & Mooney, Andrew, 2008. "Does narrative information bias individual's decision making? A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(12), pages 2079-2088, December.
    11. Loewenstein, George & Ubel, Peter A., 2008. "Hedonic adaptation and the role of decision and experience utility in public policy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1795-1810, August.
    12. Cornelia Betsch & Niels Haase & Frank Renkewitz & Philipp Schmid, 2015. "The narrative bias revisited: What drives the biasing influence of narrative information on risk perceptions?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(3), pages 241-264, May.

    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:21:y:2001:i:1:p:60-68. 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.

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