The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures
Open accessAbstract
The way in which information is presented affects both how health professionals introduce it and how patients use it \n \nThe “information age” has profound implications for the way we work. The volume of information derives from biomedical and clinical evaluative sciences and is increasingly available to clinicians and patients through the world wide web.1 We need to process information, derive knowledge, and disseminate the knowledge into clinical practice. This is particularly challenging for doctors in the context of the consultation. Information often highlights uncertainties, including collective professional uncertainty, which we address with more and better research; individual professional uncertainty, which we address with professional education and support for decisions; and stochastic uncertainty (the irreducible element of chance), which we address with effective risk communication about the harms and benefits of different options for treatment or care. \n \nIn this article we discuss whether the shift towards a greater use of information in consultations is helpful and summarise the current literature on risk communication. We also explore how information can be used without losing the benefits that are traditionally associated with the art, rather than the science, of 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.
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
Cites
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions
Stacey, D., Légaré, F., Lewis, K., Barry, M. J., Bennett, C. L., Eden, K. B., Holmes-Rovner, M., Llewellyn-Thomas, H., Lyddiatt, A., Thomson, R., et al. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001431.pub5 · Cited by 6,685
Gail, M. H., Brinton, L. A., Byar, D. P., Corle, D. K., Green, S. B., Schairer, C., & Mulvihill, J. J. (1989) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/81.24.1879 · Cited by 3,334
Cosmides, L. (1996) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(95)00664-8 · Cited by 1,293
Cited by
Shared decision making: A model for clinical practice
Elwyn, G., Frosch, D., Thomson, R., Joseph-Williams, N., Lloyd, A., Kinnersley, P., Cording, E., Tomson, D., Dodd, C., Rollnick, S., et al. (2012) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6 · Cited by 4,405
Self-citationElmore, J. G. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.293.10.1245 · Cited by 1,075
Communicating Evidence for Participatory Decision Making
Epstein, R. M. (2004) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.291.19.2359 · Cited by 628
Strategies to help patients understand risks
Paling, J. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7417.745 · Cited by 552
Design Features of Graphs in Health Risk Communication: A Systematic Review
Ancker, J. S., Senathirajah, Y., Kukafka, R., & Starren, J. B. (2006) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2115 · Cited by 548
Metadata
- Authors
- Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., & Mulley, A.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2002-04-06
- Volume
- 324
- Issue
- 7341
- Pages
- 827.1-830
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- OpenAlex
- W2054043896
- Cited by
- 644
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 97.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.324.7341.827
- The paper
- Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., & Mulley, A. (2002). Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7341.827
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.