IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v28y2008i6p866-874.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health Decision Making: Lynchpin of Evidence-Based Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Bonnie Spring

    (Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University,Chicago, Illinois, and Hines Hospital VA Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois,bspring@northwestern.edu)

Abstract

Health decision making is both the lynchpin and the least developed aspect of evidence-based practice. The evidence-based practice process requires integrating the evidence with consideration of practical resources and patient preferences and doing so via a process that is genuinely collaborative. Yet, the literature is largely silent about how to accomplish integrative, shared decision making. Implications for evidence-based practice are discussed for 2 theories of clinician decision making (expected utility and fuzzy trace) and 2 theories of patient health decision making (transtheoretical model and reasoned action). Three suggestions are offered. First, it would be advantageous to have theory-based algorithms that weight and integrate the 3 data strands (evidence, resources, preferences) in different decisional contexts. Second, patients, not providers, make the decisions of greatest impact on public health, and those decisions are behavioral. Consequently, theory explicating how provider-patient collaboration can influence patient lifestyle decisions made miles from the provider's office is greatly needed. Third, although the preponderance of data on complex decisions supports a computational approach, such an approach to evidence-based practice is too impractical to be widely applied at present. More troublesomely, until patients come to trust decisions made computationally more than they trust their providers' intuitions, patient adherence will remain problematic. A good theory of integrative, collaborative health decision making remains needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Bonnie Spring, 2008. "Health Decision Making: Lynchpin of Evidence-Based Practice," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(6), pages 866-874, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:6:p:866-874
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08326146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08326146
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X08326146?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Valerie F. Reyna, 2008. "A Theory of Medical Decision Making and Health: Fuzzy Trace Theory," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(6), pages 850-865, November.
    2. Martin Fishbein, 2008. "A Reasoned Action Approach to Health Promotion," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(6), pages 834-844, November.
    3. Frieden, T.R. & Mostashari, F. & Kerker, B.D. & Miller, N. & Hajat, A. & Frankel, M., 2005. "Adult tobacco use levels after intensive tobacco control measures: New York City, 2002-2003," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 95(6), pages 1016-1023.
    4. James O. Prochaska, 2008. "Decision Making in the Transtheoretical Model of Behavior Change," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(6), pages 845-849, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peder A. Halvorsen, 2010. "What Information Do Patients Need to Make a Medical Decision?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(5_suppl), pages 11-13, September.
    2. Marilyn Stringer & Tali Averbuch & Pamela Mack Brooks & Loretta Sweet Jemmott, 2012. "Response to Homeless Childbearing Women’s Health Care Learning Needs," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 21(2), pages 195-212, May.
    3. Volker Thoma & Elliott White & Asha Panigrahi & Vanessa Strowger & Irina Anderson, 2015. "Good Thinking or Gut Feeling? Cognitive Reflection and Intuition in Traders, Bankers and Financial Non-Experts," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Scherr, Sebastian & Reifegerste, Doreen & Arendt, Florian & van Weert, Julia C.M. & Alden, Dana L., 2022. "Family involvement in medical decision making in Europe and the United States: A replication and extension in five Countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).
    5. Gabriella Passerini & Laura Macchi & Maria Bagassi, 2012. "A methodological approach to ratio bias," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(5), pages 602-617, September.
    6. Yasmina Okan & Eric R. Stone & Jonathan Parillo & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew M. Parker, 2020. "Probability Size Matters: The Effect of Foreground‐Only versus Foreground+Background Graphs on Risk Aversion Diminishes with Larger Probabilities," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 771-788, April.
    7. Mehdi Mourali & Zhiyong Yang, 2023. "Misperception of Multiple Risks in Medical Decision-Making," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(1), pages 25-47.
    8. Paquin, Ryan S. & Peay, Holly L. & Gehtland, Lisa M. & Lewis, Megan A. & Bailey, Donald B., 2016. "Parental intentions to enroll children in a voluntary expanded newborn screening program," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 17-24.
    9. Wagner, Brandon G. & Cleland, Kelly & Batur, Pelin & Wu, Justine & Rothberg, Michael B., 2019. "Emergency contraception: Links between providers' counseling choices, prescribing behaviors, and sociopolitical context," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 242(C).
    10. Norman C. H. Wong & Eryn Bostwick, 2017. "#WhyITold: A Pilot Test of Twitter Messages Aimed at Promoting Bystander Intervention against Domestic Violence," Studies in Media and Communication, Redfame publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 166-175, December.
    11. Swait, J. & de Bekker-Grob, E.W., 2022. "A discrete choice model implementing gist-based categorization of alternatives, with applications to patient preferences for cancer screening and treatment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    12. Timmons, Shane & Lunn, Pete, 2022. "Public understanding of climate change and support for mitigation," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS135, June.
    13. Rasa Kanapickiene & Deimante Teresiene & Daiva Budriene & Greta Keliuotytė-Staniulėnienė & Jekaterina Kartasova, 2020. "The Impact Of Covid-19 On European Financial Markets And Economic Sentiment," Economy & Business Journal, International Scientific Publications, Bulgaria, vol. 14(1), pages 144-163.
    14. Eric R. Stone & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Abigail M. Wilkins & Emily M. Boker & Jacqueline MacDonald Gibson, 2017. "Designing Graphs to Communicate Risks: Understanding How the Choice of Graphical Format Influences Decision Making," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 612-628, April.
    15. Abhirat Supthanasup & Cathy Banwell & Matthew Kelly, 2022. "Facebook Feeds and Child Feeding: A Qualitative Study of Thai Mothers in Online Child Feeding Support Groups," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-12, May.
    16. Asare, Eris & Nakakeeto, Gertrude & Segarra, Eduardo, 2018. "Determinants of the choice of a savings option: "The case of African Households"," 2018 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2018, Jacksonville, Florida 266868, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    17. Heard, Claire Louise & Rakow, Tim, 2022. "Examining insensitivity to probability in evidence‐based communication of relative risks: the role of affect and communication format," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113810, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Andrea S. Licht & Andrew J. Hyland & Richard J. O’Connor & Frank J. Chaloupka & Ron Borland & Geoffrey T. Fong & Nigar Nargis & K. Michael Cummings, 2011. "Socio-Economic Variation in Price Minimizing Behaviors: Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-19, January.
    19. Andrea S. Licht & Andrew J. Hyland & Richard J. O’Connor & Frank J. Chaloupka & Ron Borland & Geoffrey T. Fong & Nigar Nargis & K. Michael Cummings, 2011. "How Do Price Minimizing Behaviors Impact Smoking Cessation? Findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, May.
    20. Kevin E. Tiede & Wolfgang Gaissmaier, 2023. "How Do People Process Different Representations of Statistical Information? Insights into Cognitive Effort, Representational Inconsistencies, and Individual Differences," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(7-8), pages 803-820, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:28:y:2008:i:6:p:866-874. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.