• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

高学历样本在算术量表上的总体表现。

General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples.

作者信息

Lipkus I M, Samsa G, Rimer B K

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27701, USA.

出版信息

Med Decis Making. 2001 Jan-Feb;21(1):37-44. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0102100105.

DOI:10.1177/0272989X0102100105
PMID:11206945
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Numeracy, how facile people are with basic probability and mathematical concepts, is associated with how people perceive health risks. Performance on simple numeracy problems has been poor among populations with little as well as more formal education. Here, we examine how highly educated participants performed on a general and an expanded numeracy scale. The latter was designed within the context of health risks.

METHOD

A total of 463 men and women aged 40 and older completed a 3-item general and an expanded 7-item numeracy scale. The expanded scale assessed how well people 1) differentiate and perform simple mathematical operations on risk magnitudes using percentages and proportions, 2) convert percentages to proportions, 3) convert proportions to percentages, and 4) convert probabilities to proportions.

RESULTS

On average, 18% and 32% of participants correctly answered all of the general and expanded numeracy scale items, respectively. Approximately 16% to 20% incorrectly answered the most straightforward questions pertaining to risk magnitudes (e.g., Which represents the larger risk: 1%, 5%, or 10%?). A factor analysis revealed that the general and expanded risk numeracy items tapped the construct of global numeracy.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that even highly educated participants have difficulty with relatively simple numeracy questions, thus replicating in part earlier studies. The implication is that usual strategies for communicating numerical risk may be flawed. Methods and consequences of communicating health risk information tailored to a person's level of numeracy should be explored further.

摘要

背景

数字运算能力,即人们对基本概率和数学概念的掌握程度,与人们对健康风险的认知相关。在受教育程度较低和较高的人群中,简单数字运算问题的表现都很差。在此,我们研究了受过高等教育的参与者在一般数字运算量表和扩展数字运算量表上的表现。后者是在健康风险背景下设计的。

方法

共有463名年龄在40岁及以上的男性和女性完成了一个包含3个项目的一般数字运算量表和一个扩展的包含7个项目的数字运算量表。扩展量表评估了人们1)使用百分比和比例对风险大小进行区分和执行简单数学运算的能力,2)将百分比转换为比例的能力,3)将比例转换为百分比的能力,以及4)将概率转换为比例的能力。

结果

平均而言,分别有18%和32%的参与者正确回答了所有一般数字运算量表项目和扩展数字运算量表项目。大约16%至20%的参与者错误地回答了与风险大小相关的最直接的问题(例如,哪个代表更大的风险:1%、5%还是10%?)。因素分析表明,一般和扩展的风险数字运算项目都涉及整体数字运算的结构。

结论

这些结果表明,即使是受过高等教育的参与者在相对简单的数字运算问题上也有困难,从而部分重复了早期的研究。这意味着通常传达数字风险的策略可能存在缺陷。应进一步探索根据个人数字运算水平量身定制的健康风险信息沟通方法及其后果。

相似文献

1
General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples.高学历样本在算术量表上的总体表现。
Med Decis Making. 2001 Jan-Feb;21(1):37-44. doi: 10.1177/0272989X0102100105.
2
Health numeracy and understanding of risk among older American Indians and Alaska Natives.美国印第安人和阿拉斯加原住民的健康算数能力和风险理解。
J Health Commun. 2012;17(3):294-302. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2011.626497. Epub 2011 Dec 21.
3
The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography.数字能力在理解乳腺钼靶筛查益处方面的作用。
Ann Intern Med. 1997 Dec 1;127(11):966-72. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-11-199712010-00003.
4
Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale.无需数学测试来衡量数字能力:主观数字能力量表的编制
Med Decis Making. 2007 Sep-Oct;27(5):672-80. doi: 10.1177/0272989X07304449. Epub 2007 Jul 19.
5
Statistical numeracy for health: a cross-cultural comparison with probabilistic national samples.健康领域的统计数字能力:与概率性全国样本的跨文化比较。
Arch Intern Med. 2010 Mar 8;170(5):462-8. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2009.481.
6
Asthma numeracy skill and health literacy.哮喘数字能力与健康素养。
J Asthma. 2006 Nov;43(9):705-10. doi: 10.1080/02770900600925585.
7
A cross sectional study on fertility knowledge in Japan, measured with the Japanese version of Cardiff Fertility Knowledge Scale (CFKS-J).一项使用日语版加的夫生育知识量表(CFKS-J)对日本生育知识进行的横断面研究。
Reprod Health. 2015 Jan 31;12:10. doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-12-10.
8
Comprehension of Internet-based numeric cancer information by older adults.老年人对基于互联网的癌症数字信息的理解。
Inform Health Soc Care. 2009 Dec;34(4):209-24. doi: 10.3109/17538150903358552.
9
Assessing health numeracy among community-dwelling older adults.评估社区居住老年人的健康数字素养。
J Health Commun. 2007 Oct-Nov;12(7):651-65. doi: 10.1080/10810730701619919.
10
Using icon arrays to communicate medical risks: overcoming low numeracy.使用图标阵列传达医疗风险:克服低数字素养问题。
Health Psychol. 2009 Mar;28(2):210-6. doi: 10.1037/a0014474.

引用本文的文献

1
Characterizing clinician communication with patients about lecanemab: A qualitative study of clinicians across seven academic medical centers.描述临床医生与患者关于lecanemab的沟通情况:一项对七个学术医疗中心临床医生的定性研究。
Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2025 Aug 26;11(3):e70150. doi: 10.1002/trc2.70150. eCollection 2025 Jul-Sep.
2
Exploring mock juror evaluations of forensic evidence conclusion formats within a complete expert report.在完整的专家报告中探究模拟陪审员对法医证据结论格式的评估。
Forensic Sci Int Synerg. 2024 Dec 20;10:100564. doi: 10.1016/j.fsisyn.2024.100564. eCollection 2025 Jun.
3
Understanding Financial Exploitation Among Older Adults: The Role of Financial Skills, Scam Susceptibility, and Demographic Factors.
了解老年人中的金融剥削:金融技能、诈骗易感性和人口因素的作用。
Sage Open Aging. 2025 Jan-Dec;11. doi: 10.1177/30495334251327509. Epub 2025 Apr 3.
4
Patient Preferences for Episodic Migraine Medications: A Discrete Choice Experiment of Self-Injectable Versus Oral Treatments Targeting Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Pathway.发作性偏头痛药物的患者偏好:一项针对降钙素基因相关肽通路的自注射与口服治疗的离散选择实验。
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2025 Mar 29;19:839-853. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S496736. eCollection 2025.
5
A randomized study of 2 risk assessment models for individualized breast cancer risk estimation.一项关于两种用于个体化乳腺癌风险评估的风险评估模型的随机研究。
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2025 Aug 1;117(8):1593-1604. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djaf067.
6
The impact of temporal framing of breast cancer risk on perceptions of and motivations to engage with information about early diagnosis: Evidence from an online experiment.乳腺癌风险的时间框架对早期诊断信息认知及获取动机的影响:来自一项在线实验的证据
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 26;20(3):e0320245. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0320245. eCollection 2025.
7
Development and evaluation of patient-centred polygenic risk score reports for glaucoma screening.用于青光眼筛查的以患者为中心的多基因风险评分报告的开发与评估。
BMC Med Genomics. 2025 Jan 30;18(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12920-024-02079-z.
8
Behavioral nudges prevent loan delinquencies at scale: A 13-million-person field experiment.行为助推可大规模预防贷款拖欠:一项针对1300万人的实地实验。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 Jan 28;122(4):e2416708122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2416708122. Epub 2025 Jan 23.
9
Cognitive reflection is a distinct and measurable trait.认知反射是一种独特且可衡量的特质。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024 Dec 3;121(49):e2409191121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2409191121. Epub 2024 Nov 27.
10
Access to results of patient reported outcome surveys did not improve longitudinal patient reported outcomes in breast cancer patients in a randomized controlled trial.在一项随机对照试验中,获取患者报告结局调查结果并未改善乳腺癌患者的纵向患者报告结局。
Am J Surg. 2025 Jan;239:116054. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2024.116054. Epub 2024 Oct 30.