Literature DB >> 23864161

Risk preferences: consequences for test and treatment thresholds and optimal cutoffs.

Stefan Felder1,2, Thomas Mayrhofer2.   

Abstract

Risk attitudes include risk aversion as well as higher-order risk preferences such as prudence and temperance. This article analyzes the effects of such preferences on medical test and treatment decisions, represented either by test and treatment thresholds or-when the test result is not given-by optimal cutoff values for diagnostic tests. For a risk-averse decision maker, effective treatment is a risk-reducing strategy since it prevents the low health outcome of forgoing treatment in the sick state. Compared with risk neutrality, risk aversion thus lowers both the test and the treatment threshold and decreases the optimal test cutoff value. Risk vulnerability, which combines risk aversion, prudence, and temperance, is relevant if there is a comorbidity risk: thresholds and optimal cutoff values decrease even more. Since common utility functions imply risk vulnerability, our findings suggest that diagnostics in low prevalence settings (e.g., screening) may be considered more beneficial when risk preferences are taken into account.

Keywords:  decision analysis; decision rules; patient decision making; provider decision making; value of information

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23864161     DOI: 10.1177/0272989X13493969

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Decis Making        ISSN: 0272-989X            Impact factor:   2.583


  7 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.  Utility-Based Multicriteria Model for Screening Patients under the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Lucia Reis Peixoto Roselli; Eduarda Asfora Frej; Rodrigo José Pires Ferreira; Alexandre Ramalho Alberti; Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 2.238

3.  The threshold model revisited.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Iztok Hozo; Thomas Mayrhofer; Jef van den Ende; Gordon Guyatt
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 2.431

4.  Too much or too little information: how unknown uncertainty fuels time inconsistency.

Authors:  Inhwa Kim; Keith J Gamble
Journal:  SN Bus Econ       Date:  2022-01-19

5.  Rationality, practice variation and person-centred health policy: a threshold hypothesis.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Robert M Hamm; Thomas Mayrhofer; Iztok Hozo; Jef Van den Ende
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 2.431

6.  Higher-order risk preferences in social settings.

Authors:  Timo Heinrich; Thomas Mayrhofer
Journal:  Exp Econ       Date:  2017-09-08

7.  Regret-sensitive treatment decisions.

Authors:  Yoichiro Fujii; Yusuke Osaki
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2018-08-06
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.