Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 26, 2026
Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
Assessing risk communication in breast cancer: are continuous measures of patient knowledge better than categorical?
Jeffrey Belkora1, Dan H Moore, David W Hutton
1University of California, San Francisco, CA 94118, United States. jeff.belkora@ucsfmedctr.org
Objective:
To compare the performance of categorical and continuous measures of patient knowledge in the context of risk communication about breast cancer, in terms of statistical and clinical significance as well as efficiency.
Methods:
Twenty breast cancer patients provided estimates of 10-year mortality risk before and after their oncology visit. The oncologist reviewed risk estimates from Adjuvant!, a well-validated and commonly used prognostic model. Using the Adjuvant! estimates as a gold standard, we calculated how accurate the patient estimates were before and after the visit. We used three novel continuous measures of patient accuracy, the absolute bias, Brier, and Kullback-Leibler scores, and compared them to a categorical measure in terms of sensitivity to intervention effects. We also calculated the sample size required to replicate the primary study using the categorical and continuous measures, as a means of comparing efficiency.
Results:
In this sample, the Kullback-Leibler measure was most sensitive to the intervention effects (p=0.004), followed by Brier and absolute bias (both p=0.011), and finally the categorical measure (0.125). The sample size required to replicate the primary study was 18 for the Kullback-Leibler measure, 23 for absolute bias and Brier, and 37 for the categorical measure.
Conclusions:
The continuous measures led to more efficient sample sizes and to rejection of the null hypothesis of no intervention effect. However, the difference in sensitivity of the continuous measures was not statistically significant, and the performance of the categorical measure depends on the researcher's categorical cutoff for accuracy. Continuous measures of patient accuracy may be more sensitive and efficient, while categorical measures may be more clinically relevant.
Practice Implications:
Researchers and others interested in assessing the accuracy of patient knowledge should weigh the trade-offs between clinical relevance and statistical significance while designing or evaluating risk communication studies.
Related Concept Videos
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
01:21Cancer Survival Analysis
01:25Role of Communication in the Nursing Process I: Assessment and Diagnosis
The nursing process considers the patient's emotional and physical well-being. The process can be repeated or stopped at any point if judged essential. Assessment is the first step in the nursing process.
01:24Kaplan-Meier Approach
01:21Barriers to Effective Communication II
Cultural barriers:
Differences in values, beliefs, religion, knowledge, and tradition can significantly impact communication. Awareness of nonverbal cues is critical, especially when conversing with a patient from a different culture. What appears appropriate in one culture may be inappropriate in another.
Semantic barriers:
As a result of their tendency to use...
01:24Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching I: Assessment and Diagnosis
It is critical to determine the patient's learning needs during the assessment. Determination of learning needs compounds data from the...