# On the appropriateness of appropriateness judgments: The case of interferon treatment for melanoma

## Author Info

• Yoav Ganzach
• Moshe Leshno
Registered author(s):

## Abstract

We compare experts' judgments of the appropriateness of a treatment (interferon treatment for melanoma) on the basis of important attributes of this disease (thickness, ulceration, lymph node involvement and type of metastases) to a decision analytic model in which the probabilities of deterioration are derived from the medical literature and from epidemiological studies. The comparison is based on what we call \textit{the linearity test}, which examines whether appropriateness judgments are a linear function of the epidemiological value of $p_2$, the probability of deterioration of the patient condition if he would have received the treatment. This comparison allows for the assessment of the validity of the experts' judgments under the assumption that the decision analytic model is valid, or alternatively, the assessment of the validity of the decision analytic model under the assumption that the experts' judgments are valid. Under the former assumption the results indicate that appropriateness judgments are by and large accurate. Under the latter assumption the results support the idea of a \textit{constant treatment effect}, the idea that efficacy of a treatment is constant over various levels of severity of the disease. Our results also support the idea that experts' aggregate judgments far exceed individuals' judgments.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://journal.sjdm.org/jdm06156.pdf

File URL: http://journal.sjdm.org/06156/jdm06156.htm

## Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Society for Judgment and Decision Making in its journal Judgment and Decision Making.

Volume (Year): 2 (2007)
Issue (Month): (February)
Pages: 70-78

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:jdm:journl:v:2:y:2007:i::p:70-78

Contact details of provider:

## Related research

Keywords: aggregating judgment; medical treatment decisions; decision analylitic models of judgment; melanoma treatment; ecological validity; Brunswickian models.;

## References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

## Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

## Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jdm:journl:v:2:y:2007:i::p:70-78

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jonathan Baron).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.