Biomedical subjects

Terry Connolly

Publications and source records attributed to Terry Connolly.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Regret in cancer-related decisions.

Decision-related regret is a negative emotion associated with thinking about a past or future choice. The thinking component generally takes the form of a wish that things were otherwise and involves a comparison of what actually did or will take place with some better alternative--a "counterfactual thought." For predecisional (anticipated) regret, the thinking involves a mental simulation of the outcomes that might result from different choice options. Prior research has focused on regret associated with decision outcomes, addressing especially (a) the comparison outcome selected and (b) whether the outcome resulted from action or inaction. More recent research examines regret associated with the choice itself and with the preceding decision process. Interest here has focused on the justifiability of the choice made or the process used. In this article, the authors review current regret research and propose directions for extending it to cancer-related decisions.

Decision Making↗

PubMed2002

Coronary artery bypass grafting: an off-pump versus on-pump review.

There has been a proliferation in the number of coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) being performed without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). However, the benefits of off-pump coronary artery grafting (OPCAB) are still being determined. The aim of this retrospective review was to compare the perioperative outcomes of CPB patients with OPCAB patients and to identify the patients most likely to benefit from the off-pump procedure. We reviewed the perioperative data of all isolated CABG patients at two metropolitan hospitals for the period of August 2000 to September 2001. The two groups (OPCAB vs. CPB) were further divided into subgroups identifying patients by their predicted mortality (higher-risk and lower-risk) and the number of distal graft anastomoses received (1, 2, 3, 4, or 5). A p value less than .05 was considered significant. Out of the total of 882 patients, 46.2% were OPCAB cases. Both CPB and OPCAB groups were similar in terms of demographics and predicted risk of mortality. Intraoperatively, OPCAB patients had fewer distal graft anastomoses (2.4 +/- 1.0 vs. 3.2 +/- 1.0, p < .001). Postoperatively, patients in the OPCAB group had less chest drainage (889 +/- 588 vs. 989 +/- 662 mls, p < .001), sustained fewer strokes (0.2 vs. 1.9%, p < .05), were transfused less (15.4 vs. 32.5%, p < .001) and were discharged earlier (7.3 +/- 5.6 vs. 8.5 +/- 9.1 days, p < .05). For higher-risk patients, OPCAB was associated with fewer reoperations for bleeding (1.3 vs. 6.4%, p < .05), a lower stroke rate (0 vs. 3.2%, p < .05), and a trend toward lower mortality (7.1 vs. 15.1%, p = .08). However, lower-risk OPCAB patients' stroke incidences (0.5% OPCAB group vs. 1.4% CPB group), and mortality rates (0.5 vs. 0.5%) were similar. Comparisons by number of grafts performed revealed that only the single-grafted OPCAB patients had statistically fewer postoperative complications, reduced chest drainage, and a shorter intensive care stay. Differences between either operation groups in transfusion rates were only statistically significant for the one to three grafted patients, while postoperative stays were similar for patients having four grafts. These results suggest that OPCAB is associated with a reduction in mortality and morbidity, particularly within the higher-risk patients. However, the benefits of OPCAB diminished with an increasing number of distal anastomoses performed.

Aged↗

PubMed2001

Predicting Affective Responses to Unexpected Outcomes.

In decisions under uncertainty, decision makers confront two uncertainties: the uncertain linkage between actions and outcomes and the uncertain linkage between these outcomes and his or her affective responses to them. The two studies reported here examine affective responses to expected and unexpected outcomes in various settings. In Study 1, a scenario-based laboratory experiment (N = 149), we examined subjects' predicted responses to a range of outcomes, as a function of how surprising the outcome was. Study 2, a field study (N = 127), involved the expectations of bowlers about their scores in an upcoming game and about their responses to various outcomes at, above, and below expectations. We also measured actual affective reactions after the bowlers had completed their games. Findings suggest that subjects both expect and experience a loss-averse, expectation-based value function broadly of the Prospect Theory type. They also anticipate, and experience, an amplifying effect of outcome surprise, though they underestimate its size. We argue that such underestimation, together with overtight prediction ranges, may expose subjects to much larger affective variation with outcome variability than they anticipate. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗