Benjamin Djulbegovic1, Iztok Hozo2, William Dale1. 1. Department of Supportive Care Medicine, City of Hope, Duarte, California, USA. 2. Department of Mathematics, Indiana University NW, Gary, Indiana, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contemporary delivery of health care is inappropriate in many ways, largely due to suboptimal Q5 decision-making. A typical approach to improve practitioners' decision-making is to develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG) by guidelines panels, who are instructed to use their judgments to derive practice recommendations. However, mechanisms for the formulation of guideline judgments remains a "black-box" operation-a process with defined inputs and outputs but without sufficient knowledge of its internal workings. METHODS: Increased explicitness and transparency in the process can be achieved by implementing CPG as clinical pathways (CPs) (also known as clinical algorithms or flow-charts). However, clinical recommendations thus derived are typically ad hoc and developed by experts in a theory-free environment. As any recommendation can be right (true positive or negative), or wrong (false positive or negative), the lack of theoretical structure precludes the quantitative assessment of the management strategies recommended by CPGs/CPs. RESULTS: To realize the full potential of CPGs/CPs, they need to be placed on more solid theoretical grounds. We believe this potential can be best realized by converting CPGs/CPs within the heuristic theory of decision-making, often implemented as fast-and-frugal (FFT) decision trees. This is possible because FFT heuristic strategy of decision-making can be linked to signal detection theory, evidence accumulation theory, and a threshold model of decision-making, which, in turn, allows quantitative analysis of the accuracy of clinical management strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Fast-and-frugal provides a simple and transparent, yet solid and robust, methodological framework connecting decision science to clinical care, a sorely needed missing link between CPGs/CPs and patient outcomes. We therefore advocate that all guidelines panels express their recommendations as CPs, which in turn should be converted into FFTs to guide clinical care.
BACKGROUND: Contemporary delivery of health care is inappropriate in many ways, largely due to suboptimal Q5 decision-making. A typical approach to improve practitioners' decision-making is to develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (CPG) by guidelines panels, who are instructed to use their judgments to derive practice recommendations. However, mechanisms for the formulation of guideline judgments remains a "black-box" operation-a process with defined inputs and outputs but without sufficient knowledge of its internal workings. METHODS: Increased explicitness and transparency in the process can be achieved by implementing CPG as clinical pathways (CPs) (also known as clinical algorithms or flow-charts). However, clinical recommendations thus derived are typically ad hoc and developed by experts in a theory-free environment. As any recommendation can be right (true positive or negative), or wrong (false positive or negative), the lack of theoretical structure precludes the quantitative assessment of the management strategies recommended by CPGs/CPs. RESULTS: To realize the full potential of CPGs/CPs, they need to be placed on more solid theoretical grounds. We believe this potential can be best realized by converting CPGs/CPs within the heuristic theory of decision-making, often implemented as fast-and-frugal (FFT) decision trees. This is possible because FFT heuristic strategy of decision-making can be linked to signal detection theory, evidence accumulation theory, and a threshold model of decision-making, which, in turn, allows quantitative analysis of the accuracy of clinical management strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Fast-and-frugal provides a simple and transparent, yet solid and robust, methodological framework connecting decision science to clinical care, a sorely needed missing link between CPGs/CPs and patient outcomes. We therefore advocate that all guidelines panels express their recommendations as CPs, which in turn should be converted into FFTs to guide clinical care.
Authors: Charlotte Koldeweij; Nicholas Appelbaum; Carmen Rodriguez Gonzalvez; Joppe Nijman; Ruud Nijman; Ruchi Sinha; Ian Maconochie; Jonathan Clarke Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 3.752
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
Authors: Per Magnus Mæhle; Ingrid Kristine Small Hanto; Sigbjørn Smeland Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-09 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Isa Mambetsariev; Rebecca Pharaon; Arin Nam; Kevin Knopf; Benjamin Djulbegovic; Victoria M Villaflor; Everett E Vokes; Ravi Salgia Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2018-07-06
Authors: Ahmed Salem; Hossam Elamir; Huda Alfoudri; Mohammed Shamsah; Shams Abdelraheem; Ibtissam Abdo; Mohammad Galal; Lamiaa Ali Journal: BMJ Open Qual Date: 2020-11