Objective: To assess the ability of health care professionals to evalu
ate the effect of clinical test results in different settings. Design:
Subjects were presented with a series of generic clinical scenarios i
n which information about the test performance and the pretest probabi
lity of disease was varied. The subject estimates of posttest probabil
ity were compared with those calculated on the basis of Bayes' theorem
. Participants: Fifty health care professionals, including 31 physicia
ns and 19 nonphysicians, associated with a university teaching hospita
l. Measurements and main results: Under a variety of testing condition
s, both the physicians and the nonphysicians inaccurately estimated th
e posttest probability of disease. Based on a logarithmic transformati
on, the error in probability estimation was divided into a portion rel
ated to the pretest probability of disease and a portion related to th
e test performance. Most of the error in posttest probability estimati
on was associated with the incorrect use of pretest probabilities. The
subjects consistently overestimated the posttest probability of disea
se expected under Bayes' theorem, with increasing error associated wit
h decreasing pretest probability. Physician estimates of posttest prob
ability increased with increasing likelihood ratios for each scenario.
Nonphysician estimates of posttest probabilities increased with incre
asing likelihood ratios for a positive test, but the estimates associa
ted with a negative test result were inconsistent. Conclusions: Physic
ians and nonphysicians overestimate posttest probabilities with increa
sing error associated with decreasing disease risk. Some nonphysicians
may not fully understand the effect of test performance on risk estim
ation, particularly in the setting of a negative test. Health care pro
fessionals should receive training in the proper evaluation of test in
formation, with particular emphasis on the influence of pretest diseas
e risk on the posttest probability of disease.