H. Allemand, B. Seradour, and A. Weil, Baisse de l'incidence des cancers du sein en, en France : un phénomène paradoxal, pp.11-15, 2005.

V. Beral, M. Women-study, and . Collaborators, Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy: the Million Women Study, The Lancet, vol.362, issue.9392, pp.419-427, 2003.
DOI : 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14596-5

S. Bogardus, E. Holmboe, and J. Jekel, Perils, Pitfalls, and Possibilities in Talking About Medical Risk, Survey of Anesthesiology, vol.44, issue.2, 1999.
DOI : 10.1097/00132586-200004000-00058

H. Bucher, M. Weinbacher, and K. Gyr, Influence of method of reporting study results on decision of physicians to prescribe drugs to lower cholesterol concentration, BMJ, vol.309, issue.6957, pp.761-765, 1994.
DOI : 10.1136/bmj.309.6957.761

A. Edwards, G. Elwyn, and A. Mulley, Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures, BMJ, vol.324, issue.7341, pp.827-857, 2002.
DOI : 10.1136/bmj.324.7341.827
URL : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1122766

H. Einhorn and R. Hogarth, Decision Making Under Ambiguity, The Journal of Business, vol.59, issue.S4, pp.225-50, 1986.
DOI : 10.1086/296364
URL : http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA167084

B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, S. Lichtenstein, S. Read, and B. Combs, How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits, Policy Sciences, vol.11, issue.2, pp.127-152, 1978.
DOI : 10.1007/BF00143739

L. Forrow, W. Taylor, and R. Arnold, Absolutely relative: How research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions, The American Journal of Medicine, vol.92, issue.2, pp.121-125, 1992.
DOI : 10.1016/0002-9343(92)90100-P

A. Fournier, F. Berrino, and E. Riboli, Breast cancer risk in relation to different types of hormone replacement therapy in the E3N-EPIC cohort, International Journal of Cancer, vol.158, issue.3, pp.448-454, 2005.
DOI : 10.1002/ijc.20710
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inserm-00129104

G. Gigerenzer and A. Edwards, Simple tools for understanding risks: from innumeracy to insight, BMJ, vol.327, issue.7417, pp.741-745, 2003.
DOI : 10.1136/bmj.327.7417.741

G. Gigerenzer and U. Hoffrage, How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats., Psychological Review, vol.102, issue.4, pp.684-704, 1995.
DOI : 10.1037/0033-295X.102.4.684
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.128.3201

D. Grady, Postmenopausal Hormones ??? Therapy for Symptoms Only, New England Journal of Medicine, vol.348, issue.19, pp.1835-1842, 2003.
DOI : 10.1056/NEJMp030038

W. Greene, Econometric Analysis, 2003.

U. Hoffrage, S. Lindsey, R. Hertwig, and G. Gigerenzer, MEDICINE: Communicating Statistical Information, Medicine. Communicating statistical information, pp.2261-2263, 2000.
DOI : 10.1126/science.290.5500.2261

K. Howard and G. Salkeld, Does Attribute Framing in Discrete Choice Experiments Influence Willingness to Pay? Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Screening for Colorectal Cancer, Value in Health, vol.12, issue.2, 2008.
DOI : 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00417.x

J. Hux and C. Naylor, Communicating the Benefits of Chronic Preventive Therapy, Medical Decision Making, vol.35, issue.2, pp.152-159, 1995.
DOI : 10.1177/0272989X9501500208

T. Kjaer, M. Bech, D. Gyrd-hansen, and K. Hart-hansen, Ordering effect and price sensitivity in discrete choice experiments: need we worry?, Health Economics, vol.28, issue.11, pp.1217-1245, 2006.
DOI : 10.1002/hec.1117

T. Maddala, K. Phillips, and F. Johnson, An experiment on simplifying conjoint analysis designs for measuring preferences, Health Economics, vol.37, issue.12, pp.1035-1082, 2003.
DOI : 10.1002/hec.798

D. Mazur and D. Hickam, Patients??? interpretations of probability terms, Journal of General Internal Medicine, vol.5, issue.3, pp.237-277, 1991.
DOI : 10.1007/BF02598968

D. Mazur and J. Merz, Patients' interpretations of verbal expressions of probability: Implications for securing informed consent to medical interventions, Behavioral Sciences & the Law, vol.53, issue.4, pp.417-443, 1994.
DOI : 10.1002/bsl.2370120410

D. Mcfadden, Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour, In Frontiers of, pp.105-142, 1974.

J. Morris and J. Hammitt, Using Life Expectancy to Communicate Benefits of Health Care Programs in Contingent Valuation Studies, Medical Decision Making, vol.16, issue.1, pp.468-478, 2001.
DOI : 10.1177/0272989X0102100605

M. Politi, P. Han, and N. Col, Communicating the Uncertainty of Harms and Benefits of Medical Interventions, Medical Decision Making, vol.27, issue.5, pp.681-95, 2007.
DOI : 10.1177/0272989X07307270

J. Rossouw, G. Anderson, and R. Prentice, Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial, Journal of the American Medical Association, vol.288, issue.3, pp.321-368, 2002.

A. Scott, Identifying and analysing dominant preferences in discrete choice experiments: An application in health care, Journal of Economic Psychology, vol.23, issue.3, pp.383-398, 2002.
DOI : 10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00082-X

P. Slovic, M. Finucane, E. Peters, and D. Mcgregor, The affect heuristic, 2003.

. Kahneman, Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive judgment

J. Swait and J. Louviere, The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models, Journal of Marketing Research, vol.30, issue.3, pp.305-314, 1993.
DOI : 10.2307/3172883

A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, Science, vol.185, issue.4157, pp.1124-1155, 1974.
DOI : 10.1126/science.185.4157.1124

A. Tversky and D. Kahneman, The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice, Science, vol.211, issue.4481, pp.453-458, 1981.
DOI : 10.1126/science.7455683

K. Zwerina, J. Huber, and W. Kuhfield, A general method for constructing efficient choice designs, 1996.