Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Patient Preferences and Treatment Thresholds under Diagnostic Risk – An Economic Laboratory Experiment

Contents:

Author Info

  • Miriam Krieger
  • Thomas Mayrhofer

    ()

Abstract

We study risk aversion and prudence in medical treatment decisions. In a laboratory experiment, we investigate the frequency and intensity of second- and third-order risk preferences, as well as the effect of the medical decision context. Risk preferences are assessed through treatment thresholds (the indifference point between not treating and treating). Under diagnostic risk, medical decision theory predicts lower thresholds for risk-averse than risk-neutral decision makers. Given a comorbidity risk, prudent individuals have an even lower threshold. Our results demonstrate risk-averse and prudent behavior in medical decisions, which reduce the (average) treatment threshold by 41% relative to risk neutrality (from 50.0% to 29.3% prevalence rate). Risk aversion accounts for 3/4 of this effect, prudence for 1/4. The medical decision framing does not affect risk aversion, but is associated with more and stronger prudent behavior. These findings have consequences for treatment thresholds, diagnostics, and QALYs, and thus for clinical guidelines.

Download Info

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://repec.rwi-essen.de/files/REP_12_321.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen in its series Ruhr Economic Papers with number 0321.

as in new window
Length: 33 pages
Date of creation: Mar 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:rwi:repape:0321

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Hohenzollernstraße 1-3, 45128 Essen
Phone: (0201)8149-0
Fax: (0201)8149-200
Email:
Web page: http://www.rwi-essen.de/
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Web: http://www.rwi-essen.de/publikationen/

Related research

Keywords: Medical decision making; treatment thresholds; risk aversion; prudence; laboratory experiment;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Santos-Pinto, Luís & Astebro, Thomas & Mata, José, 2009. "Preference for Skew in Lotteries: Evidence from the Laboratory," MPRA Paper 17165, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  2. Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Does the Random-Lottery Incentive System Elicit True Preferences? An Experimental Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 971-78, September.
  3. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
  4. Dohmen Thomas & Falk Armin & Huffman David & Sunde Uwe & Schupp Jürgen & Wagner Gert G., 2009. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants and Behavioral Consequences," Research Memorandum 039, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
  5. Sebastian Ebert & Daniel Wiesen, 2011. "Testing for Prudence and Skewness Seeking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1334-1349, July.
  6. John A. List, 2004. "Neoclassical Theory Versus Prospect Theory: Evidence from the Marketplace," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 615-625, 03.
  7. John A. List, 2003. "Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 118(1), pages 41-71, February.
  8. Amiram Gafni & George W. Torrance, 1984. "Risk Attitude and Time Preference in Health," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(4), pages 440-451, April.
  9. Louis Eeckhoudt & Harris Schlesinger, 2005. "Putting Risk in its Proper Place," CESifo Working Paper Series 1462, CESifo Group Munich.
  10. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
  11. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Ahmed Driouchi & Olivier L’Haridon, 2011. "Risk aversion elicitation: reconciling tractability and bias minimization," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(1), pages 63-80, July.
  12. Stefan Felder & Thomas Mayrhofer, 2011. "Higher-Order Risk Preferences – Consequences for Test and Treatment Thresholds and Optimal Cutoffs," Ruhr Economic Papers 0287, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
  13. Cary Deck & Harris Schlesinger, 2010. "Exploring Higher Order Risk Effects," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 77(4), pages 1403-1420.
  14. Louis Eeckhoudt & Christian Gollier, 2005. "The impact of prudence on optimal prevention," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 989-994, November.
  15. Eeckhoudt, L. & Lebrun, T.H. & Sailly, J.C., 1984. "Risk-Aversion and Physicians' Medical Decision-Making," Cahiers de recherche 8438, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
  16. Gerald Richardson & Andrea Manca, 2004. "Calculation of quality adjusted life years in the published literature: a review of methodology and transparency," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(12), pages 1203-1210.
  17. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
  18. Eike B. Kroll & Judith N. Trarbach & Bodo Vogt, 2011. "Determining risk preferences for pain," FEMM Working Papers 110006, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
  19. Noussair, C.N. & Trautmann, S.T. & Kuilen, G. van de, 2011. "Higher Order Risk Attitudes, Demographics, and Financial Decisions," Discussion Paper 2011-055, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  20. Dynan, Karen E, 1993. "How Prudent Are Consumers?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 1104-13, December.
  21. Peter Wakker & Daniel Deneffe, 1996. "Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities Are Distorted or Unknown," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(8), pages 1131-1150, August.
  22. Karen E. Dynan, 1993. "How prudent are consumers?," Working Paper Series / Economic Activity Section 135, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  23. Bleichrodt, Han & Crainich, David & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 2003. "The effect of comorbidities on treatment decisions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 805-820, September.
  24. Robin Cubitt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 1998. "On the Validity of the Random Lottery Incentive System," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 115-131, September.
  25. Christophe Courbage & Béatrice Rey, 2006. "Prudence and optimal prevention for health risks," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(12), pages 1323-1327.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

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

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rwi:repape:0321. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

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.