Should Aggregate Patient Preference Data Be Used to Make Decisions on Behalf of Unrepresented Patients
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15747944 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nathaniel Sharadin (0000-0002-4610-664X, College of New Jersey, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue | 7 |
| Pages | E566-574 |
| Publication date | 2019-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The AMA Journal of Ethic (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2376-6980 • E-ISSN: 2376-6980 |
| Publisher | American Medical Association (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1001/amajethics.2019.566 |
| PMID | 31333171 |
| OpenAlex | W2955285038 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 2 |
Patient preference predictors aim to solve the moral problem of making treatment decisions on behalf of incapacitated patients. This commentary on a case of an unrepresented patient at the end of life considers 3 related problems of such predictors: the problem of restricting the scope of inputs to the models (the "scope" problem), the problem of weighing inputs against one another (the "weight" problem), and the problem of multiple reasonable solutions to the scope and weight problems (the "multiple reasonable models" problem). Each of these problems poses challenges to reliably implementing patient preference predictors in important, high-stakes health care decision making. This commentary also suggests a way forward
Aggregate (composite · Aggregate data · Economics · Microeconomics · Preference · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Healthcare Policy and Management · Medicine · Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues · Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.29 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2019 - 2025 (7) |
| Highly cited | No |