IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v29y2009i1p140-148.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving Fast and Frugal Modeling in Relation to Regression Analysis: Test of 3 Models for Medical Decision Making

Author

Listed:
  • Lars G. Backlund

    (Center for Family and Community Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden)

  • Johan Bring

    (Center for Family and Community Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden)

  • Ylva SkÃ¥nér

    (Center for Family and Community Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden)

  • Lars-Erik Strender

    (Center for Family and Community Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden)

  • Henry Montgomery

    (Center for Family and Community Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Huddinge, Sweden)

Abstract

Background . A matching heuristic (MH) model of decision making has been evaluated previously in a series of studies on medical decision making. The authors' purpose is to evaluate an extended MH model that considers the prevalence of cue values. Methods . Data from 2 previous studies were reanalyzed, one on judgments regarding drug treatment of hyperlipidemia and the other on diagnosing heart failure. The original MH model and the extended MH model were compared with logistic regression (LR) in terms of fit to actual judgments, number of cues, and the extent to which the cues were consistent with clinical guidelines. Results . There was a slightly better fit with LR compared with MH. The extended MH model gave a significantly better fit than the original MH model in the drug treatment task. In the diagnostic task, the number of cues was significantly lower in the MH models compared to LR, whereas in the therapeutic task, LR could be less or more frugal than the matching heuristic models depending on the significance level chosen for inclusion of cues. For the original MH model, but not for the extended MH model or LR, the most important cues in the drug treatment task were often used in a direction contrary to treatment guidelines. Conclusions . The extended MH model represents an improvement in that prevalence of cue values is adequately taken into account, which in turn may result in better fit and in better agreement with medical guidelines in the evaluation of cues.

Suggested Citation

  • Lars G. Backlund & Johan Bring & Ylva SkÃ¥nér & Lars-Erik Strender & Henry Montgomery, 2009. "Improving Fast and Frugal Modeling in Relation to Regression Analysis: Test of 3 Models for Medical Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 29(1), pages 140-148, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:29:y:2009:i:1:p:140-148
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X08326091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X08326091
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X08326091?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. Gerd Gigerenzer & Reinhard Selten (ed.), 2002. "Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262571641, December.
    2. Backlund, Lars & Skaner, Ylva & Montgomery, Henry & Bring, Johan & Strender, Lars-Erik, 2003. "Doctors' decision processes in a drug-prescription task: The validity of rating scales and think-aloud reports," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 108-117, May.
    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. Meißner, Martin & Oppewal, Harmen & Huber, Joel, 2020. "Surprising adaptivity to set size changes in multi-attribute repeated choice tasks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 163-175.
    2. Christian Hilbe & Moshe Hoffman & Martin A. Nowak, 2015. "Cooperate without Looking in a Non-Repeated Game," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Andrew W. Bausch, 2014. "Evolving intergroup cooperation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 369-393, December.
    4. Aspasia Tsaoussi & Eleni Zervogianni, 2010. "Judges as satisficers: a law and economics perspective on judicial liability," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 333-357, June.
    5. Mandel, Antoine & Taghawi-Nejad, Davoud & Veetil, Vipin P., 2019. "The price effects of monetary shocks in a network economy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 300-316.
    6. Nicolas Marciales Parra, 2013. "A mathematical model for consumers based on aspiration adaptation theory and bounded rationality," Review of Applied Socio-Economic Research, Pro Global Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 136-143, June.
    7. Binder, Carola C., 2017. "Measuring uncertainty based on rounding: New method and application to inflation expectations," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 1-12.
    8. Giovanni Dosi & Marcelo C. Pereira & Maria Enrica Virgillito, 2017. "The footprint of evolutionary processes of learning and selection upon the statistical properties of industrial dynamics," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(2), pages 187-210.
    9. Simonovits, András & Vincze, János & Méder, Zsombor Zoltán, 2012. "Adómorál és adócsalás - társadalmi preferenciák és korlátozott racionalitás [Tax morale and tax system: social preferences and bounded rationality]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 1086-1106.
    10. Cheng, Ing-Haw & Hsiaw, Alice, 2022. "Distrust in experts and the origins of disagreement," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    11. Jens Weghake & Claudia Keser & Martin Schmidt & Mathias Erlei, 2018. "Pricing in Asymmetric Two-Sided Markets: A Laboratory Experiment," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0018, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    12. Creutzig, Felix, 2020. "Limits to Liberalism: Considerations for the Anthropocene," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    13. Frank, Richard G. & Zeckhauser, Richard J., 2007. "Custom-made versus ready-to-wear treatments: Behavioral propensities in physicians' choices," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1101-1127, December.
    14. Gabriel A. Giménez-Roche, 2011. "A Socially Situated Praxeological Approach to Entrepreneurship," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India, vol. 20(2), pages 159-187, September.
    15. Hamed M. Zolbanin & Dursun Delen & Durand Crosby & David Wright, 2020. "A Predictive Analytics-Based Decision Support System for Drug Courts," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 1323-1342, December.
    16. Duersch, Peter & Oechssler, Jörg & Schipper, Burkhard C., 2012. "Unbeatable imitation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 88-96.
    17. Michael H. Birnbaum & Daniel Navarro-Martinez & Christoph Ungemach & Neil Stewart & Edika G. Quispe-Torreblanca, 2016. "Risky Decision making: Testing for violations of transitivity predicted by an editing mechanism," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(1), pages 75-91, January.
    18. Clement A. Tisdell, 2017. "Bounded Rationality, Satisficing and the Evolution of Economic Thought," Economic Theory, Applications and Issues Working Papers 264873, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    19. Filippini, Massimo & Hirl, Bettina & Masiero, Giuliano, 2018. "Habits and rational behaviour in residential electricity demand," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 137-152.

    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:29:y:2009:i:1:p:140-148. 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.