Abstract
BACKGROUND: People are increasingly presented with medical statistics. There are no existing measures to assess their level of interest or confidence in using medical statistics.
OBJECTIVE: To develop 2 new measures, the STAT-interest and STAT-confidence scales, and assess their reliability and validity.
DESIGN: Survey with retest after approximately 2 weeks.
SUBJECTS: Two hundred and twenty-four people were recruited from advertisements in local newspapers, an outpatient clinic waiting area, and a hospital open house.
MEASURES: We developed and revised 5 items on interest in medical statistics and 3 on confidence understanding statistics.
RESULTS: Study participants were mostly college graduates (52%); 25% had a high school education or less. The mean age was 53 (range 20 to 84) years. Most paid attention to medical statistics (6% paid no attention). The mean (SD) STAT-interest score was 68 (17) and ranged from 15 to 100. Confidence in using statistics was also high: the mean (SD) STAT-confidence score was 65 (19) and ranged from 11 to 100. STAT-interest and STAT-confidence scores were moderately correlated (r=.36, P<.001). Both scales demonstrated good test-retest repeatability (r=.60, .62, respectively), internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α=0.70 and 0.78), and usability (individual item nonresponse ranged from 0% to 1.3%). Scale scores correlated only weakly with scores on a medical data interpretation test (r=.15 and .26, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The STAT-interest and STAT-confidence scales are usable and reliable. Interest and confidence were only weakly related to the ability to actually use data.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Risk assessment tool for estimating 10-y risk of developing hard CHD. Third report of the expert panel on detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood cholesterol in adults. National cholesterol education program. http://hin.nhlbi.nih.gov/atpiii/calculator.asp?usertype=prof. Accessed August 12, 2004.
Breast cancer risk assessment tool. National Cancer Institute. http://bcra.nci.nih.gov/brc/. Accessed August 12, 2004.
Nease RF, Brooks WB. Patient desire for information and decision making in health care decisions: the autonomy preference index and the health opinion survey. J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10:593–600.
Ende J, Kazis L, Ash A, Moskowitz M. Measuring patients’ desire for autonomy. J Gen Intern Med. 1989;4:23–30.
Roberts D, Bilderback E. Reliability and validity of a statistics attitude survey. Educ Psychol Meas. 1980;40:235–8.
Roberts D, Saxe J. Validity of a statistics attitude survey: a follow-up study. Educ Psychol Meas. 1982;42:907–12.
Schultz K, Koshino H. Evidence of reliability and validity for wise’s attitude toward statistics scale. Psych Rep. 1998;82:27–31.
Suinn R, Winston E. The mathematics anxiety rating scale, a brief version: psychometric data. Psych Rep. 2003;92:167–73.
Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Welch HG. Assessing patient’s ability to interpret medical data: a validation study. Med Dec Making. 2005;25:290–300.
DeVellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 2003.
Department of Veterans Affairs. VHA Notice 99-02. Shared decision making. June 15, 1999. http://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=1081. Accessed April 8, 2004.
Health Research: What’s in it for consumers? Report of the Standing Advisory Group on Consumer Involvement in the NHS Research and Development Programme. 1997. www.invo.org.uk/pdf/whats_in_it_for_consumers.pdf. Accessed August 12, 2004.
Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2001.
Sheridan S, Harris R, Woolf S. Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention: a suggested approach from the US Preventive Services Task Force. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:56–66.
Winker MA, Flanagin A, Chi-Lum B, et al. Guidelines for medical and health information sites on the internet: principles governing AMA web sites. American Medical Association. JAMA. 2000;283:1600–6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare for this article or this research.
Dr. Schwartz is supported by Veterans Affairs Career Development Awards in Health Services Research and Development. Drs. Schwartz and Woloshin are supported by Robert Wood Johnson Generalist Faculty Scholar Awards and National Cancer Institute grants #CA91052-01 and CA104721. All the authors are supported by a Research Enhancement Award from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Government.
See editorial by Montori, p. 1071
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Woloshin, S., Schwartz, L.M. & Welch, H.G. Patients and medical statistics. J GEN INTERN MED 20, 996–1000 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-005-0245-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-005-0245-7