The right tool is what they need, not what we have: a taxonomy of appropriate levels of precision in patient risk communication.
about
Factors affecting uptake and adherence to breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysisRisk calculators-methods, development, implementation, and validation.Discussion of Average versus Extreme Case Severity in Pandemic Risk CommunicationsThe value of personalised risk information: a qualitative study of the perceptions of patients with prostate cancer.Stories of MDM: from a conversation to a career of making less data more useful.Impact of delivery models on understanding genomic risk for type 2 diabetesFamily history in primary care pediatrics.Real life clinic visits do not match the ideals of shared decision makingNumeracy and literacy independently predict patients' ability to identify out-of-range test resultsStriking a balance in communicating pharmacogenetic test results: promoting comprehension and minimizing adverse psychological and behavioral responseDecision making and cancer.Effects of personalized colorectal cancer risk information on laypersons' interest in colorectal cancer screening: The importance of individual differences.My Lived Experiences Are More Important Than Your Probabilities: The Role of Individualized Risk Estimates for Decision Making about Participation in the Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR).How do people interpret information about colorectal cancer screening: observations from a think-aloud study.The development and testing of a brief ('gist-based') supplementary colorectal cancer screening information leaflet.Understanding Genetic Breast Cancer Risk: Processing Loci of the BRCA Gist Intelligent Tutoring System.Negotiating Tensions Between Theory and Design in the Development of Mailings for People Recovering From Acute Coronary Syndrome.Blocks, ovals, or people? Icon type affects risk perceptions and recall of pictographs.How lay people understand and make sense of personalized disease risk information.Strengths and Gaps in Physicians' Risk Communication: A Scenario Study of the Influence of Numeracy on Cancer Screening Communication.Barriers in using cardiometabolic risk information among consumers with low health literacy.Effects of Numerical Versus Foreground-Only Icon Displays on Understanding of Risk Magnitudes.Gist Representations and Communication of Risks about HIV-AIDS: A Fuzzy-Trace Theory Approach.Delivering pharmacogenetic testing in a primary care setting.The Gist of Juries: Testing a Model of Damage Award Decision Making.Don't know responses to cognitive and affective risk perception measures: Exploring prevalence and socio-demographic moderators.Communicating the risk of violent and offending behavior: review and introduction to this special issue.Combining risk communication strategies to simultaneously convey the risks of four diseases associated with physical inactivity to socio-demographically diverse populations.Using an Internet-Based Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool to Improve Social-Cognitive Precursors of Physical Activity.Psychology: Good and bad news on the adolescent brain.Designing Graphs to Communicate Risks: Understanding How the Choice of Graphical Format Influences Decision Making.Providing Quantitative Information and a Nudge to Undergo Stool Testing in a Colorectal Cancer Screening Decision Aid: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
P2860
Q26773464-3B12DEF8-F90B-4AC2-BC33-9B7099B53326Q30387265-4096527F-D363-43D8-B09C-51A02A69C97BQ30400148-30F2BCF2-18EC-4B95-8B02-62870AFE9783Q30544850-D7D9C603-69F6-402D-AFE0-015E4D4D269BQ30881534-DF124494-17F1-4042-96AE-90DCBABEFB41Q33637558-C5BD7E66-1E0E-4821-A3F9-288732424031Q33821491-E8A3056D-6BCE-42E9-A490-4DF2DBF5DEFDQ33931784-79FCC2E0-FA22-4C90-A03B-BD841DF11FF1Q34063028-BA28D918-BD33-4860-89D0-1B13F9DC737EQ34173696-A79141F4-64A1-412C-97F3-5A2AC6B9E715Q35142194-56CC17E2-AD92-45DD-B394-6761C3A98038Q36068708-E93780B1-1298-4A40-9CF3-2895F0A2EA2BQ36117814-D3DBF2F4-8C3E-4206-9B57-D48405BD8133Q37333408-2CE1183E-33CC-4E48-950C-48056C92A9BFQ37394209-352F3D1C-5307-4654-8DE5-3BFBD7EA1F54Q37514263-358A30DF-D320-40AD-BE61-F8524C18DC07Q37703391-2675F125-43F1-4912-BD48-07C4ABE9CA38Q37710250-452F2317-952E-4CE6-81DE-6FE6086511ADQ39015510-37F16887-7EA5-44BF-B45C-5C53FE41BDC5Q39312413-B218993C-C12E-4904-8069-3F197FB786F7Q40694003-6EBE83E8-FAEC-4CF9-AC42-3860EDB58F39Q40845421-A46AAAE9-8CBD-4D8B-B39F-B692CA224EC4Q41120409-B5B204D0-DFB7-482F-B24E-1B6670B613F4Q41981549-2CEB3D5F-91B1-4F1E-8B96-777E688CBFEFQ42640863-3E0AE01B-FA57-4A03-BC9E-8B55B09B9775Q47549695-E4453C90-D550-4A34-B6DF-552B6F1E55E5Q47572300-86C613A0-F7EB-4C07-A336-BA1C8E940CB9Q47656530-EC26EB6A-B81C-4B13-805B-89EA9F453A68Q47932504-75670E59-EF60-43D3-A96F-F24A292D40DCQ48905430-8B231590-D6F4-459D-A127-ADD5B41926EAQ51097935-E2579244-CDC6-4E35-9A8D-FE6DBFE31088Q53629445-09FEF6CC-2172-474F-943E-A1A22BD4F328
P2860
The right tool is what they need, not what we have: a taxonomy of appropriate levels of precision in patient risk communication.
description
2012 nî lūn-bûn
@nan
2012年の論文
@ja
2012年学术文章
@wuu
2012年学术文章
@zh
2012年学术文章
@zh-cn
2012年学术文章
@zh-hans
2012年学术文章
@zh-my
2012年学术文章
@zh-sg
2012年學術文章
@yue
2012年學術文章
@zh-hant
name
The right tool is what they ne ...... in patient risk communication.
@en
The right tool is what they ne ...... in patient risk communication.
@nl
type
label
The right tool is what they ne ...... in patient risk communication.
@en
The right tool is what they ne ...... in patient risk communication.
@nl
prefLabel
The right tool is what they ne ...... in patient risk communication.
@en
The right tool is what they ne ...... in patient risk communication.
@nl
P2860
P356
P1476
The right tool is what they ne ...... in patient risk communication
@en
P2093
Brian J Zikmund-Fisher
P2860
P304
P356
10.1177/1077558712458541
P433
P577
2012-09-06T00:00:00Z