The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Presenting Risk Information A Review of the Effects of Framing and other Manipulations on Patient Outcomes
Abstract
Discussing risks and benefits of treatments or care options is becoming an increasingly important part of modern health care. This paper reviews the literature about manipulations of risk and benefit information in the clinical setting. There is a paucity of evidence in this field, particularly when examining specific manipulations. Only three categories of manipulation had three or more studies. The available evidence shows that the way information is presented can have significant effects on decisions made. The largest effects are evident when relative risk information is presented, as compared with absolute risk data. In addition, "loss framing" is more effective in influencing screening uptake behaviors than "gain framing" (odds ratio 1.18 [95% confidence interval 1.01-1.38]). There is also a pattern of evidence from studies comparing simpler with more complex information, more data with less, and those comparing numerical with verbal descriptions of risks. These studies suggest that providing more information, and which is more understandable to the patient, is associated with improved patient knowledge and a greater wariness to take treatments or participate in trials. These findings can contribute to efforts to improve communication between professionals and patients.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Helping Doctors and Patients Make Sense of Health Statistics
Gigerenzer, G., Gaissmaier, W., Kurz-Milcke, E., Schwartz, L. M., & Woloshin, S. (2007) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1539-6053.2008.00033.x · Cited by 1,336
Elmore, J. G. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1245 · Cited by 1,075
Lipkus, I. M. (2007) · Medical Decision Making · doi:10.1177/0272989x07307271 · Cited by 771
Rothman, A. J., Bartels, R. D., Wlaschin, J., & Salovey, P. (2006) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00290.x · Cited by 770
O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007) · Journal of Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10810730701615198 · Cited by 743
Metadata
- Authors
- Adrian Edwards, G. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Health Communication
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2001-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-82
- ISSN
- 1081-0730 (ISSN-L)
- 1087-0415
- OpenAlex
- W2141229480
- Cited by
- 491
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 41.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Presenting Risk Information A Review of the Effects of Framing and other Manipulations on Patient Outcomes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10810730150501413
- The paper
- Adrian Edwards, G. E. (2001). Presenting Risk Information A Review of the Effects of Framing and other Manipulations on Patient Outcomes. Journal of Health Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730150501413
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.