| Are medical outcomes fungible? A survey of voters, medical administrators, and physicians. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 20671208 Owner: NLM Status: In-Data-Review |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
PURPOSE: Many analyses of medical treatments entail the aggregation of health outcomes over patients and over time. This study assessed the extent to which voters, medical administrators, and physicians consider such aggregation to be appropriate. In addition, the study assessed whether this perceived fungibility of outcomes moderates the difference between treatment recommendations in single-play decisions (for 1 patient on 1 occasion) and those in repeated-play decisions (for several patients or for 1 patient on several occasions). METHODS: In a 5-contact mail survey of registered voters (n = 182, response rate = 52%), medical administrators (n = 123, 35%), and physicians (n = 95, 26%), respondents rated the fungibility of outcomes and indicated their preferred action in 1 of 3 scenarios involving changes in life expectancy or the duration of pain. They evaluated a risky, positive-expected-value treatment in a single-play decision, then in a repeated-play decision, and again in a repeated-play decision after they viewed the distribution of possible net outcomes. RESULTS: Perceived fungibility varied substantially across respondents in all groups, with voters giving higher fungibility ratings than administrators or physicians. Respondents' strength-of-preference ratings for treatment increased from single-play to repeated-play decisions, but these increases were moderated by perceived fungibility, as expected. When outcomes were considered fungible, treatments were much more attractive in repeated-play decisions than in single-play decisions. When outcomes were considered nonfungible, there was essentially no difference between single- and repeated-play decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations regarding risky medical treatments with positive expectations appear to depend, in part, on opinions about whether it is reasonable to aggregate medical outcomes over patients or over time. Such opinions vary widely among physicians and others. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Michael L Dekay |
Related Documents
:
|
11651608 - Unrequested termination of life: is it permissible? 11549978 - Recommendations for the ethical development and use of medical decision-support systems. 19884978 - Antidepressant-coincident mania in children and adolescents treated with selective sero... 15959648 - Genetic evaluation and counseling of couples with recurrent miscarriage: recommendation... 7341668 - Medical and surgical risks in handballing: implications of an inadequate socialization ... 2009438 - Gait laboratory investigations to assist decision making. |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article Date: 2010-07-29 |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making Volume: 31 ISSN: 1552-681X ISO Abbreviation: Med Decis Making Publication Date: 2011 Mar-Apr |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2011-03-11 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 8109073 Medline TA: Med Decis Making Country: United States |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 338-53 Citation Subset: IM |
Affiliation:
|
Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus. |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: What Makes a Tumor Diagnosis a Call to Action? On the Preference for Action versus Inaction.
Next Document: Effect of arrangement of stick figures on estimates of proportion in risk graphics.