Sir, risk literacy refers to ‘the ability to accurately interpret and act on information about risk'.1 A systematic review2 of clinicians' expectations of benefits and harms of treatments, screening, and tests found ‘clinicians more often underestimated rather than overestimated harms and overestimated rather than underestimated benefits'. The importance of risk literacy in medical decision-making3 has been recognised.
Risk literacy may also be of concern for dentists as seen in the following instance. An expert consensus panel4 recommended proximal carious lesions confined to enamel did not require restorative intervention. Some dentists5 determine need for restorations for proximal carious lesions confined to enamel of permanent teeth even in individuals with low caries activity. Risk literacy is one attribute likely different between dentists who provide restorative intervention for proximal carious lesions confined to enamel and those who provide non-invasive management and includes:
It is important to ‘recognise the enormous difference between a disease that presents clinically and “the same” disease that is found only because we have decided to search for it'.8
Dentists may benefit from assessment of risk literacy and may examine the Berlin Numeracy Test1 (http://www.riskliteracy.org) used to assess risk literacy of physicians.9 Select risk literacy resources include:
-
Harding Center for Risk Literacy (https://www.hardingcenter.de/en)
-
University of Cambridge's Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication (https://wintoncentre.maths.cam.ac.uk/).
References
Cokely E T, Galesic M, Schulz E, Ghazal S, Garcia-Retamero R. Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test. Judgm Decis Mak 2012; 7:25-47.
Hoffman T C, Del Mar C. Clinicians' expectations of the benefits and harms of treatments, screening, and tests - a systematic review. JAMA Intern Med 2017; 177: 407-419.
Operskalski J T, Barbey A K. Risk literacy in medical decision-making - how can we better represent the statistical structure of risk? Science 2016; 352: 413-414.
Banerjee A, Splieth C, Breschi L et al. When to intervene in the caries process? A Delphi consensus statement. Br Dent J 2020; 229: 474-482.
Rechmann P, Doméjean S, Rechmann B M T, Kinsel R, Featherstone J D B. Approximal and occlusal carious lesions - Restorative treatment decisions by California dentists. J Am Dent Assoc 2016; 147: 328-338.
Muñoz-Sandoval C, Gambetta-Tessini K, Botelho J N, Giacaman R A. Detection of cavitated proximal carious lesions in permanent teeth: A visual and radiographic assessment. Caries Res 2022; 56: 171-178.
Burke F J T, Lucarotti P S K. How long do direct restorations placed within the general dental services in England and Wales survive? Br Dent J 2009; doi: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.1042.
Hoffman J R, Cooper R J. Overdiagnosis of disease - a modern epidemic. Arch Intern Med 2012; 172: 1123-1124.
Friederichs H, Birkenstein R, Becker J C, Marschall B, Weissenstein A. Risk literacy assessment of general practitioners and medical students using the Berlin Numeracy Test. BMC Fam Pract 2020; doi: 10.1186/s12875-020-01214-w.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hashim Nainar, S. Increasing awareness of risk literacy. Br Dent J 235, 163–164 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-023-6169-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-023-6169-y