Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: Effects of Low Numeracy on Comprehension of Risk Communications and Utility Elicitations

Abstract

Background. In a companion article, the authors describe the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS), a self-assessment of numerical aptitude and preferences for numbers that correlates strongly with objective numeracy. Objective. The objective of this article is to validate the Subjective Numeracy Scale using measures of subjects' capacity to recall and comprehend complex risk statistics and to complete utility elicitations. Research Design. The study is composed of 3 general public surveys: 2 administered via the Web and 1 by paper and pencil. Subjects. Studies 1 and 3 surveyed 862 and 1234 people, respectively, recruited via a nationwide commercial Internet survey panel. Study 2 involved 245 people who completed paper-and-pencil surveys in a Veterans Administration hospital. Measures. The authors tested whether one's score on the SNS predicted the likelihood of correct recall and interpretation of risk information (studies 1 and 2A) or the likelihood of effectively completing a time tradeoff or person-tradeoff utility elicitation (studies 2B and 3). In Studies 1 and 2, the authors also tested whether an objective test of quantitative ability would predict performance. Results. In all studies, survey participants with higher SNS scores performed significantly better than other respondents. The predictive ability of the SNS approached that observed for objective numeracy. Conclusions. The SNS effectively predicts both risk comprehension and completion of utility elicitations without requiring survey participants to complete time-consuming and stress-inducing mathematics tests. The authors encourage the use of the SNS in a variety of health services research contexts.

Keywords

numeracy risk communication decision making literacy utility measurement. (Med Decis Making 2007;27:663—671)

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Fagerlin A. , Zikmund-Fisher BJ , Ubel PA , Jankovic A. , Derry H. , Smith DM Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS). Med Decis Making. 2007;27:672—80.

Schwartz LM , Woloshin S. , Black WC , Welch HG The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography . Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(11):966—72.

Schapira MM , Davids SL , McAuliffe TL , Nattinger AB Agreement between scales in the measurement of breast cancer risk perceptions . Risk Anal. 2004;24(3):665—73.

Woloshin S. , Schwartz LM , Moncur M. , Gabriel S. , Tosteson AN Assessing values for health: numeracy matters. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(5):382—90.

Lipkus IM , Samsa G. , Rimer BK General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Med Decis Making. 2001;21(1):37—44.

Stata Statistical Software. 8th ed. College Station (TX): Stata Corporation ; 2003.

Mazur DJ , Hickam DH The effect of physician's explanations on patients' treatment preferences: five-year survival data. Med Decis Making. 1994;14(3):255—8.

Mazur DJ , Hickam DH Patients' and physicians' interpretations of graphic data displays. Med Decis Making. 1993;13(1):59—63.

Mazur DJ , Hickam DH Interpretation of graphic data by patients in a general medicine clinic. J Gen Intern Med. 1990;5(5): 402—5.

10.

Mazur DJ , Hickam DH

Five-year survival curves: how much data are enough for patient-physician decision making in general surgery?

Eur J Surg. 1996;162(2):101—4.

11.

Armstrong K. , FitzGerald G. , Schwartz JS , Ubel PA Using survival curve comparisons to inform patient decision making can a practice exercise improve understanding? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(7):482—5.

12.

Armstrong K. , Schwartz JS , Fitzgerald G. , Putt M. , Ubel PA Effect of framing as gain versus loss on understanding and hypothetical treatment choices: survival and mortality curves. Med Decis Making. 2002;22(1):76—83.

13.

Torrance GW Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life. J Chron Dis. 1987;40(6):593—603.

14.

Russell LB , Gold MR , Siegel JE , Daniels N. , Weinstein MC The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276 (14):1172—7.

15.

Gold MR , Siegel JE , Russell LB , Weinstein M , eds. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.

16.

Nord E. , Pinto-Prades JL , Richardson J. , Menzel P. , Ubel PA Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes. Health Econ. 1999;8(1):25—39.

17.

Ubel PA , Loewenstein G. , Scanlon D. , Kamlet M. Value measurement in cost-utility analysis: explaining the discrepancy between rating scale and person trade-off elicitations. Health Policy. 1998;43(1):33—44.

18.

Ubel PA , Loewenstein G. , Scanlon D. , Kamlet M. Individual utilities are inconsistent with rationing choices: a partial explanation of why Oregon's cost-effectiveness list failed. Med Decis Making. 1996;16(2):108—16.

19.

Damschroder LJ , Baron J. , Hershey JC , Asch DA , Jepson C. , Ubel PA The validity of person tradeoff measurements: a randomized trial of computer elicitation versus face-to-face interview. Med Decis Making. 2004;24(2):170—80.

20.

Damschroder LJ , Baron J. , Hershey JC , Asch DA , Jepson C. , Ubel PA

Does being on the hot seat change people's valuation of health conditions?

Med Decis Making. 2003;23(6):557.

21.

Damschroder LJ , Miklosovic ME , Ubel PA Quality of life values change when people are primed to think about how they adapt to difficult situations. Med Decis Making. 2003;23(6):563.

22.

Couper MP The promise and perils of Web surveys. In: Westlake A , Manners T , Rigg M , eds. The Challenge of the Internet . London: Association of Survey Computing; 2001. p ix-194.