IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v29y2009i3p368-371.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Natural Frequencies Help Older Adults and People with Low Numeracy to Evaluate Medical Screening Tests

Author

Listed:
  • Mirta Galesic

    (Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany, galesic@mpibberlin.mpg.de)

  • Gerd Gigerenzer

    (Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany)

  • Nils Straubinger

    (Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany)

Abstract

Background. Understanding information about medical screening tests often requires estimating positive predictive values (i.e., posterior probabilities), which is a notoriously difficult task. Previous studies have shown that representation of information in terms of natural frequencies (i.e., counts of occurrences that preserve base rates) facilitates judgments of positive predictive values. The objective of this study was to investigate whether natural frequencies facilitate accurate estimates in elderly people and whether performance depends on numeracy skills. Elderly people are more often than younger people required to use such information to make informed choices regarding medical procedures (e.g., screenings). Method. This was an experimental study in which information about 2 medical screening tests was presented either as conditional probabilities or natural frequencies. Participants were 47 older adults (62—77 years of age; average numeracy score 8.6) and 115 younger adults (18—35 years of age; average numeracy score 10.3). Results. When the screening information was presented in terms of conditional probabilities, only 15% of the younger adults and 18% of the older adults provided accurate estimates in at least 1 of the tasks. When information was presented in terms of natural frequencies, 55% of the younger adults and 58% of the elderly participants gave correct estimates. This effect occurred without explicit training. Furthermore, participants with higher numeracy scores performed better in the estimation tasks than those with lower numeracy scores. Conclusions. Natural frequencies help elderly and young patients—including those with lower numeracy skills—to understand positive predictive values of medical screening tests.

Suggested Citation

  • Mirta Galesic & Gerd Gigerenzer & Nils Straubinger, 2009. "Natural Frequencies Help Older Adults and People with Low Numeracy to Evaluate Medical Screening Tests," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 29(3), pages 368-371, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:3:p:368-371
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08329463
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08329463
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X08329463?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. Yaniv Hanoch & Jonathan J. Rolison & Alexandra M. Freund, 2018. "Does Medical Risk Perception and Risk Taking Change with Age?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 917-928, May.
    2. Roohallah Alizadehsani & Mohamad Roshanzamir & Sadiq Hussain & Abbas Khosravi & Afsaneh Koohestani & Mohammad Hossein Zangooei & Moloud Abdar & Adham Beykikhoshk & Afshin Shoeibi & Assef Zare & Maryam, 2024. "Handling of uncertainty in medical data using machine learning and probability theory techniques: a review of 30 years (1991–2020)," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 339(3), pages 1077-1118, August.

    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:29:y:2009:i:3:p:368-371. 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.