Doctors' Understanding of Survival Statistics

The probably most commonly used measure for expressing the pay-offs of early detection and treatment are survival rates. Yet, over time and groups this metric comes with several biases and thus, is not reliable for judging such benefits. Epidemiologists recommend using reduction of disease-specific mortality rates instead, which is unbiased. The purpose of the study is to investigate how primary care physicians understand and use different survival measures for determining the benefit of cancer screening tests.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Screening

Age range

30 year–65 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

Max Planck Institute for Human Development

Berlin, 14195, Germany

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

primary care physicians (internal, general, and family medicine physicians)

Exclusion criteria

all other types of physicians

Treatment and study plan

Primary outcomes

Number of Physicians (=Participants) Recommending the Screening

Time frame: 25 minutes (mean duration of the survey)

The aim of the study was to learn how different medical cancer screening statistics would influence doctors' recommendation behavior and their effectiveness judgments of screening tests. For that reason the online survey study presented physicians with four different medical statistics (e.g., 5-year survival) within four successive scenarios and asked after each scenario whether they would recommend the screening to a (hypothetical) patient given the data. Options to answer are: Definitely yes, Probably yes, Probably no, Definitely no, Can't decide.

Secondary outcomes

Number of Physicians (= Participants) Assuming a Benefit of Screening

Time frame: 25 minutes (mean duration of the survey)

Physicians are faced with four different medical statistics about the effect of screening (e.g., 5-year survival) within four successive scenarios and after each scenario asked whether they assume the screening to be beneficial given the statistical information. Options to answer are: yes, no, can't decide. If yes, then participants are further asked to describe this benefit by the following categories: Very large, large, moderate, small, very small.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Max Planck Institute for Human Development

Other

Collaborators

Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center

Registry information

Official study title

Study of Primary Care Physicians' Understanding and Use of Different Survival Measures

Acronym: MPIB

Important dates

Study start: 2009
Primary completion: 2009
Study completion: 2009
First posted: Sep 22, 2009
Registry last updated: Aug 15, 2011

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.

Completed