Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 329

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 129 of the 129 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical Implications of Numeracy: Theory and Practice

Open access
Nelson, Wendy, Reyna, Valerie F., Fagerlin, Angela, Lipkus, Isaac, Peters, Ellen·2008·Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Low numeracy is pervasive and constrains informed patient choice, reduces medication compliance, limits access to treatments, impairs risk communication, and affects medical outcomes; therefore, it is incumbent upon providers to minimize its adverse effects. PURPOSE: We provide an overview of research on health numeracy and discuss its implications in clinical contexts. CONCLUSIONS: Low numeracy cannot be reliably inferred on the basis of patients' education, intelligence, or other observable characteristics. Objective and subjective assessments of numeracy are available in short forms and could be used to tailor health communication. Low scorers on these assessments are subject to cognitive biases, irrelevant cues (e.g., mood), and sharper temporal discounting. Because prevention of the leading causes of death (e.g., cancer and cardiovascular disease) depends on taking action now to prevent serious consequences later, those low in numeracy are likely to require more explanation of risk to engage in prevention behaviors. Visual displays can be used to make numerical relations more transparent, and different types of displays have different effects (e.g., greater risk avoidance). Ironically, superior quantitative processing seems to be achieved by focusing on qualitative gist and affective meaning, which has important implications for empowering patients to take advantage of the evidence in evidence-based medicine.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12160-008-9037-8

Cites

129 of 129 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 129 references

Cited by

See all 329

Metadata

Authors
Nelson, W., Reyna, V. F., Fagerlin, A., Lipkus, I., & Peters, E.
Venue
Annals of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2008-06
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
261-274
ISSN
  • 0742-5554 (ISSN-L)
  • 0883-6612
  • 1532-4796
OpenAlex
W2025097148
Cited by
329
References
129
FWCI
33.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical Implications of Numeracy: Theory and Practice. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s12160-008-9037-8
The paper
Nelson, W., Reyna, V. F., Fagerlin, A., Lipkus, I., & Peters, E. (2008). Clinical Implications of Numeracy: Theory and Practice. Annals of Behavioral Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-008-9037-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.