191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20116159)
21. Using plausible group sizes to communicate information about medical risks.
Garcia-Retamero R; Galesic M
Patient Educ Couns; 2011 Aug; 84(2):245-50. PubMed ID: 20728298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Patient education and health literacy.
Wittink H; Oosterhaven J
Musculoskelet Sci Pract; 2018 Dec; 38():120-127. PubMed ID: 30017902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Preference for and understanding of graphs presenting health risk information. The role of age, health literacy, numeracy and graph literacy.
van Weert JCM; Alblas MC; van Dijk L; Jansen J
Patient Educ Couns; 2021 Jan; 104(1):109-117. PubMed ID: 32727670
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Strengths and Gaps in Physicians' Risk Communication: A Scenario Study of the Influence of Numeracy on Cancer Screening Communication.
Petrova D; Kostopoulou O; Delaney BC; Cokely ET; Garcia-Retamero R
Med Decis Making; 2018 Apr; 38(3):355-365. PubMed ID: 28884617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Statistical numeracy for health: a cross-cultural comparison with probabilistic national samples.
Galesic M; Garcia-Retamero R
Arch Intern Med; 2010 Mar; 170(5):462-8. PubMed ID: 20212183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. The effect of different styles of medical illustration on information comprehension, the perception of educational material and illness beliefs.
Krasnoryadtseva A; Dalbeth N; Petrie KJ
Patient Educ Couns; 2020 Mar; 103(3):556-562. PubMed ID: 31601448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Communicating Relative Risk Changes with Baseline Risk: Presentation Format and Numeracy Matter.
Bodemer N; Meder B; Gigerenzer G
Med Decis Making; 2014 Jul; 34(5):615-26. PubMed ID: 24803429
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Comparing the impact of an icon array versus a bar graph on preference and understanding of risk information: Results from an online, randomized study.
Scalia P; Schubbe DC; Lu ES; Durand MA; Frascara J; Noel G; O'Malley AJ; Elwyn G
PLoS One; 2021; 16(7):e0253644. PubMed ID: 34297713
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Relevance of graph literacy in the development of patient-centered communication tools.
Nayak JG; Hartzler AL; Macleod LC; Izard JP; Dalkin BM; Gore JL
Patient Educ Couns; 2016 Mar; 99(3):448-454. PubMed ID: 26481910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. How Do People Process Different Representations of Statistical Information? Insights into Cognitive Effort, Representational Inconsistencies, and Individual Differences.
Tiede KE; Gaissmaier W
Med Decis Making; 2023; 43(7-8):803-820. PubMed ID: 37842816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Visual representation of statistical information improves diagnostic inferences in doctors and their patients.
Garcia-Retamero R; Hoffrage U
Soc Sci Med; 2013 Apr; 83():27-33. PubMed ID: 23465201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale.
Fagerlin A; Zikmund-Fisher BJ; Ubel PA; Jankovic A; Derry HA; Smith DM
Med Decis Making; 2007; 27(5):672-80. PubMed ID: 17641137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Using animated computer-generated text and graphics to depict the risks and benefits of medical treatment.
Tait AR; Voepel-Lewis T; Brennan-Martinez C; McGonegal M; Levine R
Am J Med; 2012 Nov; 125(11):1103-10. PubMed ID: 22939094
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Improving risk understanding across ability levels: Encouraging active processing with dynamic icon arrays.
Okan Y; Garcia-Retamero R; Cokely ET; Maldonado A
J Exp Psychol Appl; 2015 Jun; 21(2):178-94. PubMed ID: 25938975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Visual aids improve diagnostic inferences and metacognitive judgment calibration.
Garcia-Retamero R; Cokely ET; Hoffrage U
Front Psychol; 2015; 6():932. PubMed ID: 26236247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Communicating risk information: the influence of graphical display format on quantitative information perception-Accuracy, comprehension and preferences.
Price M; Cameron R; Butow P
Patient Educ Couns; 2007 Dec; 69(1-3):121-8. PubMed ID: 17905553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Numbers can be worth a thousand pictures: individual differences in understanding graphical and numerical representations of health-related information.
Gaissmaier W; Wegwarth O; Skopec D; Müller AS; Broschinski S; Politi MC
Health Psychol; 2012 May; 31(3):286-96. PubMed ID: 21842998
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Does Guiding Toward Task-Relevant Information Help Improve Graph Processing and Graph Comprehension of Individuals with Low or High Numeracy? An Eye-Tracker Experiment.
Keller C; Junghans A
Med Decis Making; 2017 Nov; 37(8):942-954. PubMed ID: 28618918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Design, development, and evaluation of visual aids for communicating prescription drug instructions to nonliterate patients in rural Cameroon.
Ngoh LN; Shepherd MD
Patient Educ Couns; 1997 Jul; 31(3):245-61. PubMed ID: 9277247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. The influence of graphic display format on the interpretations of quantitative risk information among adults with lower education and literacy: a randomized experimental study.
McCaffery KJ; Dixon A; Hayen A; Jansen J; Smith S; Simpson JM
Med Decis Making; 2012; 32(4):532-44. PubMed ID: 22074912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
