Literature DB >> 10580533

Acceptable regret in medical decision making.

B Djulbegovic1, I Hozo, A Schwartz, K M McMasters.   

Abstract

When faced with medical decisions involving uncertain outcomes, the principles of decision theory hold that we should select the option with the highest expected utility to maximize health over time. Whether a decision proves right or wrong can be learned only in retrospect, when it may become apparent that another course of action would have been preferable. This realization may bring a sense of loss, or regret. When anticipated regret is compelling, a decision maker may choose to violate expected utility theory to avoid regret. We formulate a concept of acceptable regret in medical decision making that explicitly introduces the patient's attitude toward loss of health due to a mistaken decision into decision making. In most cases, minimizing expected regret results in the same decision as maximizing expected utility. However, when acceptable regret is taken into consideration, the threshold probability below which we can comfortably withhold treatment is a function only of the net benefit of the treatment, and the threshold probability above which we can comfortably administer the treatment depends only on the magnitude of the risks associated with the therapy. By considering acceptable regret, we develop new conceptual relations that can help decide whether treatment should be withheld or administered, especially when the diagnosis is uncertain. This may be particularly beneficial in deciding what constitutes futile medical care.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Death and Euthanasia

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10580533     DOI: 10.1054/mehy.1998.0020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Hypotheses        ISSN: 0306-9877            Impact factor:   1.538


  18 in total

1.  Threshold analysis in the presence of both the diagnostic and the therapeutic risk.

Authors:  Stefan Felder; Thomas Mayrhofer
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2017-12-26

2.  Psychological benefits of prostate cancer screening: the role of reassurance.

Authors:  Scott B Cantor; Robert J Volk; Alvah R Cass; Jawaria Gilani; Stephen J Spann
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Decision-Making for the Management of Cystic Lesions of the Pancreas: How Satisfied Are Patients with Surgery?

Authors:  Priya M Puri; Ammara A Watkins; Tara S Kent; Laura Maggino; Jenna Gates Jeganathan; Mark P Callery; Jeffrey A Drebin; Charles M Vollmer
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Regret in Surgical Decision Making: A Systematic Review of Patient and Physician Perspectives.

Authors:  Ana Wilson; Sean M Ronnekleiv-Kelly; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  A regret theory approach to decision curve analysis: a novel method for eliciting decision makers' preferences and decision-making.

Authors:  Athanasios Tsalatsanis; Iztok Hozo; Andrew Vickers; Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-09-16       Impact factor: 2.796

6.  When is it rational to participate in a clinical trial? A game theory approach incorporating trust, regret and guilt.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Iztok Hozo
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Extensions to regret-based decision curve analysis: an application to hospice referral for terminal patients.

Authors:  Athanasios Tsalatsanis; Laura E Barnes; Iztok Hozo; Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 2.796

8.  Evolution and translation of research findings: from bench to where?

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Clin Trials       Date:  2006-11-17

9.  When should potentially false research findings be considered acceptable?

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Iztok Hozo
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  Dual processing model of medical decision-making.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Iztok Hozo; Jason Beckstead; Athanasios Tsalatsanis; Stephen G Pauker
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2012-09-03       Impact factor: 2.796

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.