个体化结直肠癌筛查偏好稳定性分析的意义

IF 1.9 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Pub Date : 2021-10-27 DOI:10.1002/mcda.1771
M. Gabriela Sava, Alia Stanciu, James G. Dolan, Jerrold H. May, Luis G. Vargas
{"title":"个体化结直肠癌筛查偏好稳定性分析的意义","authors":"M. Gabriela Sava,&nbsp;Alia Stanciu,&nbsp;James G. Dolan,&nbsp;Jerrold H. May,&nbsp;Luis G. Vargas","doi":"10.1002/mcda.1771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Patients are increasingly interested in becoming involved in the medical decision-making process. As a result, healthcare providers and researchers are concerned with finding new ways to integrate patients' preferences, by understanding their commitment to and the stability of those preferences. Preventive medicine, such as colorectal cancer screening, presents an opportunity for personalising the decision-making trajectory based on patients' preferences. In this paper, we propose a framework for a joint decision-making process, capable of integrating patients' changing preferences, as described by a stability analysis of those preferences and design scenarios for implementing the process in clinical practice. In this study, a secondary data analysis, we present scenarios that demonstrate how the stability analysis of an Analytic Network Process (ANP) model supports personalising the process of agreeing on an appropriate colorectal cancer screening option. We illustrate the framework using two patients whose preferences have different stabilities and for whom the healthcare provider has different rankings for the recommended alternatives. The results show the differences in additional medical information the healthcare provider might need to provide as part of the joint decision-making process in order to reach an agreement between the patient and the provider. A stability analysis of the patient's preferences provides the healthcare provider with a mapping of the preferred options. It also shows how the patient's most preferred alternative might change as the patient obtains additional relevant medical information. Knowing how the patient's priorities might change supports a personalisation of the medical decision-making process. We conclude that the healthcare provider can utilise the stability analysis of a patient's preferences to identify possible dialogue paths that would enable reaching a consensus about an appropriate screening option.</p>","PeriodicalId":45876,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","volume":"29 3-4","pages":"244-258"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implications of the stability analysis of preferences for personalised colorectal cancer screening\",\"authors\":\"M. Gabriela Sava,&nbsp;Alia Stanciu,&nbsp;James G. Dolan,&nbsp;Jerrold H. May,&nbsp;Luis G. Vargas\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mcda.1771\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Patients are increasingly interested in becoming involved in the medical decision-making process. As a result, healthcare providers and researchers are concerned with finding new ways to integrate patients' preferences, by understanding their commitment to and the stability of those preferences. Preventive medicine, such as colorectal cancer screening, presents an opportunity for personalising the decision-making trajectory based on patients' preferences. In this paper, we propose a framework for a joint decision-making process, capable of integrating patients' changing preferences, as described by a stability analysis of those preferences and design scenarios for implementing the process in clinical practice. In this study, a secondary data analysis, we present scenarios that demonstrate how the stability analysis of an Analytic Network Process (ANP) model supports personalising the process of agreeing on an appropriate colorectal cancer screening option. We illustrate the framework using two patients whose preferences have different stabilities and for whom the healthcare provider has different rankings for the recommended alternatives. The results show the differences in additional medical information the healthcare provider might need to provide as part of the joint decision-making process in order to reach an agreement between the patient and the provider. A stability analysis of the patient's preferences provides the healthcare provider with a mapping of the preferred options. It also shows how the patient's most preferred alternative might change as the patient obtains additional relevant medical information. Knowing how the patient's priorities might change supports a personalisation of the medical decision-making process. We conclude that the healthcare provider can utilise the stability analysis of a patient's preferences to identify possible dialogue paths that would enable reaching a consensus about an appropriate screening option.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45876,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis\",\"volume\":\"29 3-4\",\"pages\":\"244-258\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mcda.1771\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/mcda.1771","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

患者对参与医疗决策过程越来越感兴趣。因此,医疗保健提供者和研究人员都在关注寻找新的方法来整合患者的偏好,通过了解他们对这些偏好的承诺和稳定性。预防医学,如结肠直肠癌筛查,提供了一个基于患者偏好的个性化决策轨迹的机会。在本文中,我们提出了一个联合决策过程的框架,能够整合患者不断变化的偏好,通过对这些偏好的稳定性分析和在临床实践中实施该过程的设计方案来描述。在本研究的二次数据分析中,我们展示了分析网络过程(ANP)模型的稳定性分析如何支持在适当的结直肠癌筛查选择上达成一致的个性化过程。我们使用两个患者来说明这个框架,他们的偏好具有不同的稳定性,并且医疗保健提供者对推荐的替代方案有不同的排名。结果显示了医疗保健提供者可能需要提供的额外医疗信息的差异,作为共同决策过程的一部分,以便在患者和提供者之间达成协议。对患者偏好的稳定性分析为医疗保健提供者提供了首选选项的映射。它还显示了当患者获得额外的相关医疗信息时,患者最喜欢的替代方案可能会发生变化。了解患者的优先事项可能如何变化,有助于医疗决策过程的个性化。我们的结论是,医疗保健提供者可以利用患者偏好的稳定性分析来确定可能的对话路径,从而能够就适当的筛查选择达成共识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Implications of the stability analysis of preferences for personalised colorectal cancer screening

Patients are increasingly interested in becoming involved in the medical decision-making process. As a result, healthcare providers and researchers are concerned with finding new ways to integrate patients' preferences, by understanding their commitment to and the stability of those preferences. Preventive medicine, such as colorectal cancer screening, presents an opportunity for personalising the decision-making trajectory based on patients' preferences. In this paper, we propose a framework for a joint decision-making process, capable of integrating patients' changing preferences, as described by a stability analysis of those preferences and design scenarios for implementing the process in clinical practice. In this study, a secondary data analysis, we present scenarios that demonstrate how the stability analysis of an Analytic Network Process (ANP) model supports personalising the process of agreeing on an appropriate colorectal cancer screening option. We illustrate the framework using two patients whose preferences have different stabilities and for whom the healthcare provider has different rankings for the recommended alternatives. The results show the differences in additional medical information the healthcare provider might need to provide as part of the joint decision-making process in order to reach an agreement between the patient and the provider. A stability analysis of the patient's preferences provides the healthcare provider with a mapping of the preferred options. It also shows how the patient's most preferred alternative might change as the patient obtains additional relevant medical information. Knowing how the patient's priorities might change supports a personalisation of the medical decision-making process. We conclude that the healthcare provider can utilise the stability analysis of a patient's preferences to identify possible dialogue paths that would enable reaching a consensus about an appropriate screening option.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis was launched in 1992, and from the outset has aimed to be the repository of choice for papers covering all aspects of MCDA/MCDM. The journal provides an international forum for the presentation and discussion of all aspects of research, application and evaluation of multi-criteria decision analysis, and publishes material from a variety of disciplines and all schools of thought. Papers addressing mathematical, theoretical, and behavioural aspects are welcome, as are case studies, applications and evaluation of techniques and methodologies.
期刊最新文献
A Multi-Objective Optimization for Determination of Sustainable Crop Pattern Using Game Theory A Multi-Criteria Decision Support Tool for Shared Decision Making in Clinical Consultation Issue Information A Bibliometric Exploration of Multiple Criteria Decision Aid and Clustering—A Conceptual Taxonomy Monitoring Sustainable Development Goals: Stepwise Benchmarking Approach
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1