Comparing Probability Assessment Scales in Medical Decision Making
Author Information
Author(s): Cilia LM Witteman, Silja Renooij, Pieter Koele
Primary Institution: Radboud University Nijmegen
Hypothesis
Do different types of probability response scales affect general practitioners' assessments and preferences?
Conclusion
All three response scales are equally suitable for supporting probability assessment, with the combined verbal-numerical scale being a good choice for accommodating both experienced and less experienced professionals.
Supporting Evidence
- Less experienced GPs preferred the verbal scale, while more experienced GPs preferred the numerical scale.
- No significant differences in assessments were found across the three scales.
- Confidence in assessments was generally high, regardless of the scale used.
Takeaway
Doctors can use different types of scales to express probabilities, and they found that all scales worked well, but some preferred words while others preferred numbers.
Methodology
General practitioners assessed probabilities using three different scales: numerical, verbal, and a combined verbal-numerical scale.
Potential Biases
Potential bias in self-reported preferences and assessments.
Limitations
The study had a low response rate of 29%, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.
Participant Demographics
Of the 86 GPs, 27 were women and 57 were men, with a mean age of 47 years for women and 50 years for men.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p = .021
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website