Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep 17:6:1327.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01327. eCollection 2015.

Doctor, what does my positive test mean? From Bayesian textbook tasks to personalized risk communication

Affiliations

Doctor, what does my positive test mean? From Bayesian textbook tasks to personalized risk communication

Gorka Navarrete et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Most of the research on Bayesian reasoning aims to answer theoretical questions about the extent to which people are able to update their beliefs according to Bayes' Theorem, about the evolutionary nature of Bayesian inference, or about the role of cognitive abilities in Bayesian inference. Few studies aim to answer practical, mainly health-related questions, such as, "What does it mean to have a positive test in a context of cancer screening?" or "What is the best way to communicate a medical test result so a patient will understand it?". This type of research aims to translate empirical findings into effective ways of providing risk information. In addition, the applied research often adopts the paradigms and methods of the theoretically-motivated research. But sometimes it works the other way around, and the theoretical research borrows the importance of the practical question in the medical context. The study of Bayesian reasoning is relevant to risk communication in that, to be as useful as possible, applied research should employ specifically tailored methods and contexts specific to the recipients of the risk information. In this paper, we concentrate on the communication of the result of medical tests and outline the epidemiological and test parameters that affect the predictive power of a test-whether it is correct or not. Building on this, we draw up recommendations for better practice to convey the results of medical tests that could inform health policy makers (What are the drawbacks of mass screenings?), be used by health practitioners and, in turn, help patients to make better and more informed decisions.

Keywords: Bayesian reasoning; Bayesian textbook tasks; medical tests; positive predictive value; risk communication.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Positive predictive value for three tests with a 100% sensitivity according to the rate of false positive (A) 0.1%, (B) 1%, and (C) 2%, and to the prevalence of the condition.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Baldessarini R. J., Finklestein S., Arana G. W. (1983). The predictive power of diagnostic tests and the effect of prevalence of illness. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry, 40, 569–573. 10.1001/archpsyc.1983.01790050095011 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baratgin J., Politzer G. (2006). Is the mind Bayesian? The case for agnosticism. Mind Society 5, 1–38. 10.1007/s11299-006-0007-1 - DOI
    1. Barbey A. K., Sloman S. A. (2007). Base-rate respect: From ecological rationality to dual processes. Behav. Brain Sci. 30, 241–254. 10.1017/S0140525X07001653 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brase G. L. (2009). Pictorial representations in statistical reasoning. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 23, 369–381. 10.1002/acp.1460 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Casscells W. (1978). Interpretation by physicians of clinical laboratory results. N. Engl. J. Med. 299, 999–1001. 10.1056/NEJM197811022991808 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources