SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Decision Making”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 415 records · Page 23Linked to original sources

PubMed1999

Ethical decision-making made easier. The use of decision trees in case management.

Case managers have never before faced the multitude of difficult ethical dilemmas that now confront them daily. Legal, medical, social, and ethical considerations often fly in the face of previously reliable intuitions. The importance and urgency of facing these dilemmas head-on has resulted in clear calls for action. What are the appropriate legal, ethical, and professional parameters for effective decision making? Are normatively sensitive, but also practically sensible protocols possible? In an effort to address these concerns, Alternatives for the Older Adult, Inc., Rock Island, Illinois established an ethics committee to look into possible means of resolving or dissolving commonly occurring dilemmas. As a result of year-long deliberations, the committee formulated a decision-making strategy whose central apparatus is the decision tree--a flowchart of reasonable decisions and their consequent implications. In this article, we explore the development of this approach as well as the theory that underlies it.

Aged↗

PubMed1992

Dynamic decision making: human control of complex systems.

This paper reviews research on dynamic decision making, i.e., decision making under conditions which require a series of decisions, where the decisions are not independent, where the state of the world changes, both autonomously and as a consequence of the decision maker's actions, and where the decisions have to be made in real time. It is difficult to find useful normative theories for these kinds of decisions, and research thus has to focus on descriptive issues. A general approach, based on control theory, is proposed as a means to organize research in the area. An experimental paradigm for the study of dynamic decision making, that of computer simulated microworlds, is discussed, and two approaches using this paradigm are described: the individual differences approach, typical of German work in the tradition of research on complex problem solving, and the experimental approach. In studies following the former approach, the behaviour of groups differing in performance is compared, either with respect to strategies or with respect to performance on psychological tests. The results show that there are wide interindividual differences in performance, but no stable correlations between performance in microworlds and scores on traditional psychological tests have been found. Experimental research studying the effects of system characteristics, such as complexity and feedback delays, on dynamic decision making has shown that decision performance in dynamic tasks is strongly affected by feedback delays and whether or not the decisions have side effects. Although neither approach has led to any well-developed theory of dynamic decision making so far, the results nevertheless indicate that we are now able to produce highly reliable experimental results in the laboratory, results that agree with those found in field studies of dynamic decision making. This shows that an important first step towards a better understanding of these phenomena has been taken.

Computer Simulation↗

PubMed1978

Decision making in nursing: an analytical approach.

Decision making is a basic function of all nurse leaders. Because of the complex nature of many decision situations faced by nurses, problem solving and decision making in nursing are as much an art as a science. The Vroom and Yetton model of decision making is an appropriate tool through which nurses involved in patient care management can examine their decision making and improve their decision behavior. Use of this model is suggested as an approach to teaching decision making at the undergraduate and graduate level of nursing education. Case material has been presented to help readers identify their favored methods of decision making and to point out possible deficiencies in these methods.

Administrative Personnel↗

PubMed1991

Decision making in dentistry. Part II: Clinical applications of decision methods.

The study of clinical decision making provides a common model on which to base dental practice and thus promotes standardization of care and treatment. Decision analysis can assist in identifying missing data in clinical problems and thus generate clinically relevant research agendas. Part II reviews the current literature focusing on three areas of decision making in dentistry: diagnosis, treatment planning, and disease prediction. The growing body of literature indicates that wide variation exists among the treatment plans made by dentists. Considerable bias arises from many sources of uncertainty in decision making, including the limitations of human memory and judgment. Literature pertaining to computer application of decision analysis in dentistry and to policy making are reviewed.

Decision Making↗

PubMed1999

Clinical decision making: an emergency medicine perspective.

Clinical decision making (CDM) describes a form of qualitative inquiry that examines the thought processes involved in making medical decisions. A significant body of literature exists on the orderly "hypothetico-deductive" model of clinical decision making. However, very little has been written on how CDM differs in the acute setting. This paper reviews the common methods of CDM and their relevance to emergency medicine (EM). The concept of diagnostic uncertainty and the utility of the diagnosis of unknown etiology in the disposition phase of the emergency patient visit are discussed. Finally, a unique EM perspective on clinical decision-making errors is presented.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Clinical decision-making: theory and practice.

Nurses have to make important clinical decisions in their everyday practice. This article provides an introduction to the theory of clinical decision-making, describes the type of decisions that nurses make and outlines the different approaches that can be used to make a decision.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed1998

Paternalism in healthcare decision making.

Paternalism is described as a dominant attitude of one over another. It was widely practiced years ago because clinicians were usually expected to make the best decision for the patient. Modern healthcare, with its many technically advanced diagnostic and treatment modalities complicates decision making. The trend legally and morally is to include the patient in the decision making process because patients are increasingly informed and able to participate in the decision making process. However, the risks of paternalism continue to be a debatable issue in healthcare. The purpose of this article is to describe types of paternalism, to present justification for paternalism, and to offer a case study to illustrate the struggle that occurs when decisions made by clinicians collide with decisions made by patients.

Amputation, Surgical↗

PubMed2006

Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests.

BACKGROUND: There is a trend towards greater patient involvement in healthcare decisions. Adequate discussion of the risks and benefits associated with different choices is often required if involvement is to be genuine and effective. Achieving both the adequate involvement of consumers and informed decision making are now seen as important goals for any screening programme. Personalised risk estimates have been shown to be effective methods of risk communication in general, but the effectiveness of different strategies has not previously been examined. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of different types of personalised risk communication for consumers making decisions about taking screening tests. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2004), MEDLINE (1985 to December 2005), EMBASE (1985 to December 2005), CINAHL (1985 to December 2005), and PsycINFO (1989 to December 2005). Follow-up searches involved hand searching Preventive Medicine, citation searches on seven authors, and searching reference lists of articles. For the original version of this review (Edwards 2003c) we also searched CancerLit (1985 to 2001) and Science Citation Index Expanded (searched March 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials addressing the decision by consumers of whether or not to undergo screening, incorporating an intervention with a 'personalised risk communication element' and reporting cognitive, affective, or behavioural outcomes. A 'personalised risk communication element' is based on the individual's own risk factors for a condition (such as age or family history). It may be calculated from an individual's risk factors using formulae derived from epidemiological data, and presented as an absolute or relative risk or as a risk score, or it may be categorised into, for example, high, medium or low risk groups. It may be less detailed still, involving a listing, for example, of a consumer's risk factors as a focus for discussion and intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed each trial for quality and extracted data. We extracted data about the nature and setting of the intervention, and relevant outcome data, along with items relating to methodological quality. We then used standard statistical methods of the Consumers and Communication Review Group to combine data using MetaView, including analysis according to different levels of detail of personalised risk communication, different condition for screening, and studies based only on high risk participants rather than people at 'average' risk. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included, nine of which were added in the 2006 update of this review. There was weak evidence, consistent with a small effect, that personalised risk communication (whether written, spoken or visually presented) increases uptake of screening tests (odds ratio (OR) 1.31 (random effects, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.77). In three studies the interventions showed a trend towards more accurate risk perception (OR 1.65 (95% CI 0.96 to 2.81), and three other trials with heterogenous outcome measures showed improvements in knowledge with personalised risk interventions. There was little other evidence from these studies that the interventions promoted or achieved informed decision making by consumers about participation in screening. More detailed personalised risk communication may be associated with a smaller increase in uptake of tests. That is, for personalised risk communication which used and presented numerical calculations of risk, the OR for test uptake was 0.82 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.03). For risk estimates or calculations which were categorised into high, medium or low strata of risk, the OR was 1.42 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.89). For risk communication that simply listed personal risk factors the OR was 1.42 (95% CI 0.95 to 2.12). Over half of the included studies assessed interventions in the context of mammography. These studies showed similar effects to the overall dataset. The five studies examining risk communication in high risk individuals (individuals at higher risk due to, for example, a family history of breast cancer or other conditions) showed larger odds ratios for uptake of tests than the other studies (random effects OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.05 to 2.88). There were insufficient data from the included studies to report odds ratios on other key outcomes such as: intention to take tests, anxiety, satisfaction with decisions, decisional conflict, knowledge and resource use. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Personalised risk communication (as currently implemented in the included studies) may have a small effect on increasing uptake of screening tests, and there is only limited evidence that the interventions have promoted or achieved informed decision making by consumers.

Communication↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Decision-making for persons with cognitive impairment and their family caregivers.

Despite the large number of persons affected by cognitive impairment, very little is known about how they and their families make choices and decisions about everyday living and long-term care. Moreover few studies have examined the concept of consumer direction, particularly the ability ofcognitively impaired persons to delegate decision-making to other persons. This study explored decision-making through personal interviews with 51 respondent pairs, or dyads (i.e., the cognitively impaired person and the family caregiver). Results suggest that persons with mild to moderate cognitive impairment are able to answer questions about their preferences for daily care and to choose a person, usually a spouse or adult child, to make a variety of decisions on their behalf by recognizing both voices-those of the care receiver and the family caregiver--we can enhance future research and practice, foster the development of consumer direction in long-term care, and advance public policy to support caregiving families.

Adult↗

PubMed1981

Surgical decision making.

The decision-making process in a general surgical outpatient clinic has been studied by following the course of 2000 consecutive newly referred patients of whom 1045 were put on surgical waiting lists. Surgeons were asked to record their reasons for selection for each of four levels of care: main ward, 5-day ward, day bed unit or minor outpatient surgery. Selections were influenced by social and psychological factors in 12 per cent of patients, the remaining 88 per cent were determined by the medical history or physical condition. The decision was assessed by monitoring the progress in hospital and the outcome at a follow-up clinic. In 84 per cent of patients arrangements had gone according to plan. Eleven (1.75 per cent) of 5-day or day care patients were transferred to a higher level of care and 13 (1.4 per cent) of the total series were re-admitted. Surgeons were asked to forecast the duration of postoperative stay. Thirty-six per cent were discharged on the day forecast, 63 per cent within 24 h and 75 per cent within 48 h. Forecasts of length of stay for hernias and varicose veins were accurate but were usually underestimated for major surgery. It is concluded that for the majority of general surgical patients the selection of the level of care and the forecast of postoperative stay were sufficiently reliable to allow confident and definite advice to be given to the patient and to allow resources to be efficiently used.

Decision Making↗

PubMed2003

The art of decision-making.

As important as sound decision-making is, many executives neglect to utilize any formal decisionmaking process. As many executives know, making the wrong decision can be disastrous, if not career ending. In today's high-pressure, complex, and challenging healthcare environment, it makes sense to follow a tried and true process for making decisions. The author examines the traditional method of problem identification, setting objectives, listing alternatives and consequences, and selecting the best solution in the decision-making process as well as new research in this field.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed1988

Factors influencing dental decision making.

In clinical decision making, dentists routinely choose between alternative treatments such as crown vs amalgam/composite buildup, root canal vs extraction, fixed bridge vs removable partial denture, and prophylaxis vs subgingival curettage or periodontal scaling. A number of technical and patient factors can influence dentists' choice of treatment in these situations; however, little is known about their relative importance. To address this issue, a list of technical (e.g., periodontal status and caries rate) and patient (e.g., cost and patient preference) factors possibly influencing choice of treatment was developed for each pair of services. Responding to a mail questionnaire, 156 general dentists in Washington State listed the top three factors influencing their choice of service in each pair. Results revealed that dentists took different factors into account in choosing among alternative treatments. Technical factors dominated over patient concerns; only about 33 percent of the dentists considered patient factors important in choosing alternative therapies. The latter group was less preventively oriented, were solo practitioners, worked longer hours, and had lower prices. Results suggest patients may have little influence on prescriptions of therapy among experienced general dentists.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗

PubMed1996

Ethical decision-making by staff nurses.

Ethical decision-making is inherent in nursing practice. Although a definite portion of the nursing literature is devoted to ethics and ethical decision-making, the profession is just beginning to ground its ethics research in the actual experience of nurses. Therefore, the purpose of this phenomenological study was to examine the experience of staff nurses as they engage in ethical decision-making. Interview data were collected from 19 staff nurses in a large, midwestern American metropolitan hospital. Interviews were subsequently transcribed and Giorgi's method of data analysis applied. The emerging description revealed four common aspects of ethical decision-making among staff nurses: context, trigger, ethical decision-making process (i.e. deliberation and integration), and outcomes. This description provides a foundation for future research regarding a descriptive theory of ethical decision-making in nursing.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about entering screening programs.

BACKGROUND: There is a trend towards greater patient involvement in health care decisions. Adequate discussion of the risks and benefits associated with different choices is often required if involvement is to be genuine and effective. Achieving adequate involvement of consumers and informed decision making are now seen as important goals for any screening programme. Individualised risk estimates have been shown to be effective methods of risk communication in general, but the effectiveness of different strategies has not previously been examined. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of different types of individualised risk communication for consumers making decisions about participating in screening. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Consumers and Communication Review Group specialised register (searched March 2001), MEDLINE (1985 to 2001), EMBASE (1985 to 2001), CancerLit (1985 to 2001), CINAHL (1985 to 2001), ClinPSYC (1989 to 2001), and the Science Citation Index Expanded (searched March 2002). Follow-up searches involved hand searching Preventive Medicine, citation searches on seven authors, and searching reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials addressing the decision by consumers of whether or not to undergo screening, incorporating an intervention with a 'personalised risk communication element' and reporting cognitive, affective, or behavioural outcomes. A 'personalised risk communication element' is based on the individual's own risk factors for a condition (such as age or family history). It may be calculated from an individual's risk factors using formulae derived from epidemiological data, and presented as an absolute risk or as a risk score, or it may be categorised into, for example, high, medium or low risk groups. It may be less detailed still, involving a listing, for example, of a consumer's risk factors as a focus for discussion and intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data about the nature and setting of the intervention, and the relevant outcome data were extracted, along with items relating to methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included. Personalised risk communication (whether written, spoken or visually presented) was associated with increased uptake of screening tests (odds ratio (OR) 1.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11 to 2.03). There was no evidence from these studies that this increase in uptake of tests was related to informed decision making by consumers. More detailed personalised risk communication was associated with a smaller increase in uptake of tests. That is, for personalised risk communication which used and presented numerical calculations of risk, the OR for test uptake was 1.22 (95% CI 0.56 to 2.68). For risk estimates or calculations which were categorised into high, medium or low strata of risk, the OR was 1.42 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.88). For risk communication that simply listed risk personal risk factors the OR was 1.7 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.48). Most of the included studies addressed mammography programmes. These studies showed slightly smaller effects than the overall dataset, again with numerical calculated risk estimates being associated with lower ORs for uptake of tests (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.29) than the other categories of (less detailed) personalised risk communication. The four studies examining risk communication in high risk individuals showed larger odds ratios for uptake of tests than the other studies. The OR for numerical calculated risk estimates was 1.48 (95% CI 1.06 to 2.07), compared to 4.66 (95% CI 2.24 to 9.69) for categorised risk estimates and 2.64 (95% CI 1.42 to 4.9) for listed personal risk factors. There were insufficient data from the included studies to report odds ratios on other key outcomes such as: intention to take tests, anxiety, satisfaction with decisions, decisional conflict, knowledge and risk perception. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Personalised risk communication (as currently implemented in the included studies) is associated with increased uptake of screening programmes, but this may not be interpretable as evidence of informed decision making by consumers.

Communication↗

PubMed2002

Relationship power, decision making, and sexual relations: an exploratory study with couples of Mexican origin.

This study explored how couples of Mexican origin define power in intimate relationships, what makes men and women feel powerful in relationships, and the role of each partner in decision making about sexual and reproductive matters. Interviews were conducted with each partner of 39 sexually active couples and data were analyzed using content analysis. Results indicate that power is perceived as control over one s partner and the ability to make decisions. Women say they feel more powerful in relationships when they make unilateral decisions and have economic independence. Men feel powerful when they have control over their partner and bring home money. Respondents agreed that women make decisions about household matters and children, while men make decisions related to money. Findings indicate that whereas couples share decision making about sexual activities and contraceptive use, men are seen as initiators of sexual activity and women are more likely to suggest condom use.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Nurses' reflections on problems associated with decision-making in critical care settings.

The present study investigated nurses' perceptions of the problems associated with their decision-making in critical care settings. This paper reports a survey of 230 Australian practising critical care nurses. In responses to a set of structured questions concerning various difficulties in making decisions, it was found that between 22 and 56% of nurses reported to be experiencing difficulties on a weekly or more frequent basis "due to knowledge base', "lack of time to make decisions', "lack of time to implement decisions', and "personal values conflicts with other staff'. Nearly one-third (30.3%) of the respondents indicated that they disagreed with other staff who were responsible for making decisions in their units on at least a weekly basis. The nurses were also invited to comment in writing on their concerns in a variety of areas. Major sources of nurse dissatisfaction included: treatment decisions for patients with poor prognoses; disharmony with medical staff concerning decision autonomy issues, especially with junior doctors; time constraints on nursing care: the demands of new intensive care technology upon the nurses' knowledge bases; and the need for in-service education to address this problem. The paper concludes with arguments for the use of in-depth interviews to further study these issues.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Parietal dysfunction is associated with increased outcome-related decision-making in schizophrenia patients.

BACKGROUND: Decision-making is a complex process and depends on a network of fronto-parietal and cingulate areas. Decision-making dysfunctions in schizophrenia patients are characterized by an alternation between stereotypic and unpredictable responses. This study tested the hypothesis that schizophrenia patients show less decision-making-related activation in the prefrontal and parietal cortex. METHODS: Fifteen schizophrenia patients were matched with fifteen normal comparison subjects. During functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanning, subjects were tested on the two-choice prediction task (predicting the location of a randomly presented stimulus) and the two-choice response task (responding according to the location of the stimulus). RESULTS: Schizophrenia patients relative to comparison subjects generated more outcome-dependent responses. Schizophrenia patients and normal comparison subjects showed decision-making-related activation in right prefrontal cortex, insula, anterior cingulate, and bilateral precuneus. Schizophrenia patients showed less activation in inferior, medial prefrontal, and right superior temporal cortex and more activation in the postcentral and inferior parietal cortex. Decision-making-related activation in both right prefrontal and bilateral parietal cortex was higher in medicated compared to unmedicated schizophrenia patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the hypothesis that the interaction between prefrontal and parietal cortex during decision-making by schizophrenia patients is dysregulated, which results in an increased outcome-dependent response selection.

Adult↗

PubMed1993

Ethical decision-making processes used by health care providers.

This paper reports the results of a study conducted with 18 health care providers (HCPs) in two Toronto hospitals. The study examined and assessed how these HCPs make clinical-ethical decisions in the light of a theoretical model of clinical-ethical decision making. Nine nurses and nine doctors were interviewed through two-phased, in-depth, semi-structured interviews. The results suggest that, in relation to the two major elements of the model, namely the ethical component and the decision theory component, the HCPs did not follow a consistent and systematic pattern of ethical decision making. Differences emerged between their actual self-reported behaviour and their potential more capability (i.e. their abstract thought process). The general picture that emerged was that decisions were made in a narrow, habitual manner, through the elimination of the most significant and demanding elements of the process. HCPs' ethical approaches affected the entire process of the decision making: their perception of the problem, their search for and selection of information and evidence, and their development of alternatives and resultant consequences. It is suggested to (a) further investigate and understand the subjective realities of the individuals involved in the decision making processes, their values and the meaning they ascribe to their choices, and (b) to establish extensive educational programmes to enhance HCPs' decision-making capacity and subsequently promote an effective and responsible professional practice.

Adult↗