• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Risk analysis >How Do Individuals Apply Risk Information When Choosing Among Health Care Interventions?
【24h】

How Do Individuals Apply Risk Information When Choosing Among Health Care Interventions?

机译：在选择医疗干预措施时，个人如何应用风险信息？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

A sample of 3,201 Danes was subjected to personal interviews in which they were asked to state their preferences for risk-reducing health care interventions based on information on absolute risk reduction (ARR) and relative risk reduction (RRR). The aim of the study was to measure the relative weighting of different types of risk information under various circumstances. The effect of presenting questions, and of explicitly formulating RRR, was analyzed. A preference for increases in RRR was demonstrated. There was a stronger inclination to choose the intervention that offered the highest RRR if RRR was explicitly stated. Individuals with more than 10 years of schooling also demonstrated a preference for increased ARR, but only when facing individually framed choices. In a social choice context, preferences for RRR remained intact, but the magnitude of ARR had no impact on choices. Results imply that social framing may induce a propensity to prefer interventions that target high-risk populations. Those respondents who had received ≤10 years of schooling demonstrated preferences for RRR but not ARR, and no impact of social framing was observed.
机译：对3,201名丹麦人进行了抽样调查，其中要求他们根据绝对风险降低（ARR）和相对风险降低（RRR）的信息陈述他们对降低风险的医疗干预措施的偏好。该研究的目的是测量在各种情况下不同类型风险信息的相对权重。分析了提出问题和明确制定存款准备金率的效果。事实证明，倾向于提高存款准备金率。如果明确提出RRR，则倾向于选择提供最高RRR的干预措施。受过10年以上教育的个人也表现出对提高ARR的偏爱，但仅当面对单独制定的选择时才如此。在社会选择的背景下，对RRR的偏好保持不变，但ARR的幅度对选择没有影响。结果表明，社会框架可能诱使人们倾向于选择针对高风险人群的干预措施。那些接受了≤10年教育的受访者表现出偏向于RRR而不是ARR，并且未观察到社交框架的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号