↓ Skip to main content

The framing effect of relative and absolute risk

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 1993
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
321 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
199 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The framing effect of relative and absolute risk
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 1993
DOI 10.1007/bf02599636
Pubmed ID
Authors

David J. Malenka, John A. Baron, Sarah Johansen, Jon W. Wahrenberger, Jonathan M. Ross

Abstract

To test whether a patient's perception of benefit is influenced by whether the benefit is presented in relative or absolute terms. Questionnaire-based study. A general medicine outpatient clinic at a rural tertiary care center associated with a medical school. 470 of 511 consecutive patients who agreed to answer a questionnaire while waiting for their clinic visit. Mean age was 49.1 years, 62.1% were female, and 51.9% had at least one year of education beyond high school. Patient response to the choice of two equally efficacious medications for the management of a hypothetical serious disease. The benefit of one medication was stated in relative terms, the other in absolute terms. Patients could choose either medication alone, indicate indifference to the choice of medication, or choose not to answer. 56.8% of the patients chose the medication whose benefit was in relative terms. 14.7% chose the medication whose benefit was in absolute terms. Only 15.5% were indifferent to the choice of medication. The patients preferred the medication whose benefit was in relative terms across a wide range of ages and educational levels. Further questioning suggested that the patients thought benefit was greater when expressed in relative terms because they ignored the underlying risk of disease and assumed it was one. The "framing" of benefit (or risk) in relative versus absolute terms may have a major influence on patient preference.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 199 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Chile 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 194 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 20%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Master 25 13%
Researcher 22 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 7%
Other 38 19%
Unknown 35 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 38 19%
Social Sciences 16 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 12 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 10 5%
Other 34 17%
Unknown 50 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,521,169
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1,218
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#321
of 21,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 21,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them