Article

Can Female Adolescents Tell Whether They Will Test Positive for Chlamydia Infection?

Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA.
Medical Decision Making (Impact Factor: 2.27). 09/2009; 30(2):189-93. DOI: 10.1177/0272989X09343308
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Having better predictors of chlamydia infection may improve health care providers' decisions about when to provide testing for Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct). Adolescents' probability judgments of significant life events in the next year and by age 20 y have shown promising validity, being significantly correlated with subsequent self-reports of having experienced these events. Here, the authors examine whether female adolescents' probability judgments of having chlamydia were correlated with the objective outcome of a Ct polymerase chain reaction assay.
Three hundred sexually active female adolescents were recruited from urban health care clinics in Pittsburgh. They assessed ''the percent chance that you have chlamydia right now,'' then answered questions about their demographic background and sexual history. Subsequently, the authors tested for Ct infection using a self-administered introital swab.
Adolescents' probability judgments of having chlamydia ''right now'' were correlated with whether they tested positive for Ct infection, even after controlling for demographic variables and sexual history. This result held when probability judgments were dichotomized in terms of whether adolescents had assigned a zero or nonzero probability. Adolescents' mean probability judgment was less than their infection rate, indicating that, on average, they underestimated their actual risk.
Adolescents can tell whether they are at increased risk for chlamydia but may need better information about its absolute magnitude. Eliciting adolescents' probability judgments of having chlamydia can add value to clinical decision making.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Wändi Bruine de Bruin, Aug 21, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
127 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Feelings of invulnerability, seen in judgments of 0% risk, can reflect misunderstandings of risk and risk behaviors, suggesting increased need for risk communication. However, judgments of 0% risk may be given by individuals who feel invulnerable, and by individuals who are rounding from small non-zero probabilities. We examined the effect of allowing participants to give more precise responses in the 0–1% range on the validity of reported probability judgments. Participants assessed probabilities for getting H1N1 influenza and dying from it conditional on infection, using a 0–100% visual linear scale. Those responding in the 0–1% range received a follow-up question with more options in that range. This two-step procedure reduced the use of 0% and increased the resolution of responses in the 0–1% range. Moreover, revised probability responses improved predictions of attitudes and self-reported behaviors. Hence, our two-step procedure allows for more precise and more valid measurement of perceived invulnerability. KeywordsRisk perceptions–Expectations–Visual linear scale–Magnifier scale–H1N1 flu
    Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 04/2011; 42(2):145-159. DOI:10.1007/s11166-011-9113-5 · 1.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Risk perceptions are central to good health decisions. People can judge valid probabilities but use 50% disproportionately. The authors hypothesized that 50% is more likely than other responses to reflect not knowing the probability, especially among individuals with low education and numeracy, and evaluated the usefulness of eliciting "don't know" explanations. Respondents (n = 1020) judged probabilities for living or dying in the next 10 years, indicating whether they gave a good estimate or did not know the chances. They completed demographics, medical history, and numeracy questions. Overall, 50% was more likely than other probabilities to be explained as "don't know" (v. "a good estimate"). Correlations of using 50% with low education and numeracy were mediated by expressing "don't know." Judged probabilities for survival and mortality explained as "don't know" had lower correlations with age, diseases, and specialist visits. When judging risks, 50% may reflect not knowing the probability, especially among individuals with low numeracy and education. Probabilities expressed as "don't know" are less valid. Eliciting uncertainty could benefit theoretical models and educational efforts.
    Medical Decision Making 04/2011; 32(2):232-6. DOI:10.1177/0272989X11404077 · 2.27 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Predictions of fuzzy-trace theory and neurobiological approaches are examined regarding risk taking in a classic decision-making task--the framing task--as well as in the context of real-life risk taking. We report the 1st study of framing effects in adolescents versus adults, varying risk and reward, and relate choices to individual differences, sexual behavior, and behavioral intentions. As predicted by fuzzy-trace theory, adolescents modulated risk taking according to risk and reward. Adults showed standard framing, reflecting greater emphasis on gist-based (qualitative) reasoning, but adolescents displayed reverse framing when potential gains for risk taking were high, reflecting greater emphasis on verbatim-based (quantitative) reasoning. Reverse framing signals a different way of thinking compared with standard framing (reverse framing also differs from simply choosing the risky option). Measures of verbatim- and gist-based reasoning about risk, sensation seeking, behavioral activation, and inhibition were used to extract dimensions of risk proneness: Sensation seeking increased and then decreased, whereas inhibition increased from early adolescence to young adulthood, predicted by neurobiological theories. Two additional dimensions, verbatim- and gist-based reasoning about risk, loaded separately and predicted unique variance in risk taking. Importantly, framing responses predicted real-life risk taking. Reasoning was the most consistent predictor of real-life risk taking: (a) Intentions to have sex, sexual behavior, and number of partners decreased when gist-based reasoning was triggered by retrieval cues in questions about perceived risk, whereas (b) intentions to have sex and number of partners increased when verbatim-based reasoning was triggered by different retrieval cues in questions about perceived risk.
    Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition 06/2011; 37(5):1125-42. DOI:10.1037/a0023943 · 3.10 Impact Factor
Show more