The impact of perception bias for cardiovascular disease risk on physical activity and dietary habits.
Zhiting Guo, Yujia Fu, Xuyang Wang and 4 others
PMID 39698132WHAT IT FOUND
Most adults misjudged their cardiovascular risk.
Many overestimated it, but people with high calculated risk often underestimated it. Those who underestimated it also reported less healthy eating.
Key findings
01Only 29.2% of participants accurately perceived their cardiovascular risk, while 64.5% overestimated it and 6.2% underestimated it.
02Among 88 participants with high objective cardiovascular risk, 44 perceived their risk as low or moderate.
03Healthy diet was lowest in the under-perception group (21.74%) and highest in the over-perception group (35.43%), and the difference was significant (P = 0.006).
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample was recruited by convenience sampling and included many younger, better educated adults with low calculated risk, so it may not represent older or lower education groups. The cross-sectional design cannot show that risk perception caused differences in physical activity or diet. Physical activity and diet were self-reported, and the study did not test any education or counselling intervention. The high objective-risk group had 88 participants and the under-perception group had 46 participants, so subgroup findings are less stable.
Declared interests
Government grants funded the study, and the funder had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, writing, or submission. Authors declared no conflict of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that correcting risk perception improves physical activity or diet. The study is cross-sectional, the physical activity difference was not significant (P = 0.278), and no intervention was tested.