IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v17y2024i1d10.1007_s40271-023-00649-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Role Preferences in Medical Decision Making: Relevance and Implications for Health Preference Research

Author

Listed:
  • Janine A. Til

    (University of Twente)

  • Alison Pearce

    (The University of Sydney, a Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW
    The University of Sydney)

  • Semra Ozdemir

    (Duke University)

  • Ilene L. Hollin

    (Temple University)

  • Holly L. Peay

    (RTI International)

  • Albert W. Wu

    (Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health)

  • Jan Ostermann

    (University of South Carolina)

  • Ken Deal

    (McMaster University)

  • Benjamin M. Craig

    (University of South Florida)

Abstract

Health preference research (HPR) is being increasingly conducted to better understand patient preferences for medical decisions. However, patients vary in their desire to play an active role in medical decisions. Until now, few studies have considered patients’ preferred roles in decision making. In this opinion paper, we advocate for HPR researchers to assess and account for role preferences in their studies, to increase the relevance of their work for medical and shared decision making. We provide recommendations on how role preferences can be elicited and integrated with health preferences: (1) in formative research prior to a health preference study that aims to inform medical decisions or decision makers, (2a) in the development of health preference instruments, for instance by incorporating a role preference instrument and (2b) by clarifying the respondent’s role in the decision prior to the preference elicitation task or by including role preferences as an attribute in the task itself, and (3) in statistical analysis by including random parameters or latent classes to raise awareness of heterogeneity in role preferences and how it relates to health preferences. Finally, we suggest redefining the decision process as a model that integrates the role and health preferences of the different parties that are involved. We believe that the field of HPR would benefit from learning more about the extent to which role preferences relate to health preferences, within the context of medical and shared decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Janine A. Til & Alison Pearce & Semra Ozdemir & Ilene L. Hollin & Holly L. Peay & Albert W. Wu & Jan Ostermann & Ken Deal & Benjamin M. Craig, 2024. "Role Preferences in Medical Decision Making: Relevance and Implications for Health Preference Research," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 17(1), pages 3-12, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-023-00649-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-023-00649-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-023-00649-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-023-00649-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hjelmgren, Jonas & Anell, Anders, 2007. "Population preferences and choice of primary care models: A discrete choice experiment in Sweden," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(2-3), pages 314-322, October.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2013. "Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-4614-7279-7, June.
    3. James G. Dolan, 1995. "Are Patients Capable of Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process and Willing to Use It to Help Make Clinical Decisions?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 15(1), pages 76-80, February.
    4. Holly O. Witteman & Ruth Ndjaboue & Gratianne Vaisson & Selma Chipenda Dansokho & Bob Arnold & John F. P. Bridges & Sandrine Comeau & Angela Fagerlin & Teresa Gavaruzzi & Melina Marcoux & Arwen Pieter, 2021. "Clarifying Values: An Updated and Expanded Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(7), pages 801-820, October.
    5. Marieke G.M. Weernink & Janine A. van Til & Holly O. Witteman & Liana Fraenkel & Maarten J. IJzerman, 2018. "Individual Value Clarification Methods Based on Conjoint Analysis: A Systematic Review of Common Practice in Task Design, Statistical Analysis, and Presentation of Results," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 38(6), pages 746-755, August.
    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. Kowalska-Pyzalska, Anna & Michalski, Rafał & Kott, Marek & Skowrońska-Szmer, Anna & Kott, Joanna, 2022. "Consumer preferences towards alternative fuel vehicles. Results from the conjoint analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    2. Mohammed Ifkirne & Houssam El Bouhi & Siham Acharki & Quoc Bao Pham & Abdelouahed Farah & Nguyen Thi Thuy Linh, 2022. "Multi-Criteria GIS-Based Analysis for Mapping Suitable Sites for Onshore Wind Farms in Southeast France," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-26, October.
    3. Nur Syabeera Begum Nasir Ahmad & Firuza Begham Mustafa & Safiah Yusmah Muhammad Yusoff, 2024. "Spatial prediction of soil erosion risk using knowledge-driven method in Malaysia’s Steepland Agriculture Forested Valley," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(6), pages 15333-15359, June.
    4. Ahgren, Bengt, 2010. "Competition and integration in Swedish health care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 91-97, July.
    5. Marva Stithou & Yiannis Kountouris & Phoebe Koundouri, 2011. "A Choice Experiments Application in Transport Infrastructure: A case study on travel time savings, accidents and pollution reduction," DEOS Working Papers 1116, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    6. Toly Chen, 2021. "A diversified AHP-tree approach for multiple-criteria supplier selection," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 431-453, October.
    7. Alessandro Venerandi & Hal Mellen & Ombretta Romice & Sergio Porta, 2024. "Walkability Indices—The State of the Art and Future Directions: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-24, August.
    8. Alessandro Mengoni & Chiara Seghieri & Sabina Nuti, 2013. "The application of discrete choice experiments in health economics: a systematic review of the literature," Working Papers 201301, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    9. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    10. Pedersen, Line Bjørnskov & Hess, Stephane & Kjær, Trine, 2016. "Asymmetric information and user orientation in general practice: Exploring the agency relationship in a best–worst scaling study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 115-130.
    11. Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Milazzo, Maria Francesca & Selvik, Jon T. & Asche, Frank & Abrahamsen, HÃ¥kon Bjorheim, 2020. "Prioritising investments in safety measures in the chemical industry by using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    12. Haneen Abuzaid & Mahmoud Awad & Abdulrahim Shamayleh, 2024. "Photovoltaic Modules’ Cleaning Method Selection for the MENA Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-23, October.
    13. Paweł Ziemba, 2019. "Inter-Criteria Dependencies-Based Decision Support in the Sustainable wind Energy Management," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-29, February.
    14. Johanna Vásquez & Sergio Botero, 2020. "Hybrid Methodology to Improve Health Status Utility Values Derivation Using EQ-5D-5L and Advanced Multi-Criteria Techniques," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    15. Shittu, A. & Kehinde, M., 2018. "Willingness to Accept Incentives for a Shift to Climate – Smart Agriculture among Smallholder Farmers in Southwest and Northcentral Nigeria," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 275983, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda & F. Reed Johnson & Shelby D. Reed & Charles Muiruri & Carolyn A. Hutyra & Richard C. Mather III, 2023. "Patient-Preference Diagnostics: Adapting Stated-Preference Methods to Inform Effective Shared Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 43(2), pages 214-226, February.
    17. Lu Wang & Pingtao Yi & Weiwei Li & Qiankun Dong, 2024. "Smart cities dynamic performance assessment in China using vertical and horizontal deviation maximization method and driving indicator analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 11847-11880, May.
    18. Guangying Jin, 2022. "Designer Selection for Complex Engineering System Design Projects Considering the Disciplines Demanded," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-25, December.
    19. Chiara Seghieri & Alessandro Mengoni & Sabina Nuti, 2014. "Applying discrete choice modelling in a priority setting: an investigation of public preferences for primary care models," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(7), pages 773-785, September.
    20. Schuldt, Johannes & Doktor, Anna & Lichters, Marcel & Vogt, Bodo & Robra, Bernt-Peter, 2017. "Insurees’ preferences in hospital choice—A population-based study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(10), pages 1040-1046.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:spr:patien:v:17:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-023-00649-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.