Decision making in pediatric oncology: Evaluation and incorporation of patient and parent preferences
Corresponding Author
Lillian Sung MD, PhD
The Division of Haematology/Oncology and Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Department of Paediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G1X8.===Search for more papers by this authorDean A. Regier PhD
Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Lillian Sung MD, PhD
The Division of Haematology/Oncology and Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Department of Paediatrics, The Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Division of Haematology/Oncology, The Hospital for Sick Children, 555 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5G1X8.===Search for more papers by this authorDean A. Regier PhD
Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Decision making in pediatric cancer is particularly difficult. There may be uncertainty about prognosis, and long-term survival estimates from trials may not be applicable to current patients. There are many motivations to conduct research into patient and provider decision making. This review discusses three approaches to understanding decision making, namely decision analysis, the threshold technique and discrete choice experiment. These techniques are applied to situations in pediatric oncology to illustrate how the results may be useful for patient care. Future work in pediatric oncology decision making should focus on methods to facilitate decision making and elicit preferences from children themselves. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2013; 60: 558–563. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
REFERENCES
- 1 Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences—I: Measurement strategies. J Clin Epidemiol 1989; 42: 345–354.
- 2 Blank T, Graves K, Sepucha K, et al. Understanding treatment decision making: Contexts, commonalities, complexities, and challenges. Ann Behav Med 2006; 32: 211–217.
- 3 Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981; 211: 453–458.
- 4 Kahneman D. A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol 2003; 58: 697–720.
- 5 Kahneman D. Thinking fast and slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2011.
- 6 Redelmeier DA, Rozin P, Kahneman D. Understanding patients' decisions. Cognitive and emotional perspectives. JAMA 1993; 270: 72–76.
- 7 Redelmeier DA, Koehler DJ, Liberman V, et al. Probability judgement in medicine: Discounting unspecified possibilities. Med Decis Making 1995; 15: 227–230.
- 8 Entwistle VA, Sowden AJ, Watt IS. Evaluating interventions to promote patient involvement in decision-making: By what criteria should effectiveness be judged? J Health Serv Res Policy 1998; 3: 100–107.
- 9 Dolan P, Kahneman D. Interpretations of utility and their implications for the valuation of health. Econ J 2008; 118: 215–234.
- 10 Swait J, Adamowicz W. The influence of task complexity on consumer choice: A latent class model of decision strategy switching. J Consum Res 2001; 28: 135–148.
- 11 Haynes RB, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH. Physicians' and patients' choices in evidence based practice. BMJ 2002; 324: 1350.
- 12 Brozek JL, Akl EA, Alonso-Coello P, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in clinical practice guidelines. Part 1 of 3. An overview of the GRADE approach and grading quality of evidence about interventions. Allergy 2009; 64: 669–677.
- 13 Llewellyn-Thomas HA. Patients' health-care decision making: A framework for descriptive and experimental investigations. Med Decis Making 1995; 15: 101–106.
- 14 Mas-Colell A, Whinston MD, Green JR. Microeconomic theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1995.
- 15 von Neumann J, Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behaviour. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1995.
- 16 Thurstone LL. A law of comparative judgement. Psych Rev 1927; 21: 721–735.
- 17 McFadden D. Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In: P Zarembka, editor. Frontiers in Econometrics. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1974. pp. 105–142.
- 18 Marschak J. Binary choice constraints on random utility indicators. In: KJ Arro, S Karlin, P Suppes, editors. Mathematical methods in the social sciences. Stanford, CA: Standord University Press; 1960.
- 19 Plous S. Descriptive models of decision making. In: PG Zimbardo, editor. The psychology of judgment and decision making. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc; 1993. pp. 94–105.
- 20 Plous S. The representativeness heuristic. In: PG Zimbardo, editor. The psychology of judgment and decision making. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc; 1993. pp. 109–120.
- 21 Guyatt GH, Sinclair J, Cook DJ, et al. Users' guides to the medical literature: XVI. How to use a treatment recommendation. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group and the Cochrane Applicability Methods Working Group. JAMA 1999; 281: 1836–1843.
- 22
Briggs A,
Schulpher M,
Claxton K.
Decision modelling for health economic evaluation.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press;
2006.
10.1093/oso/9780198526629.001.0001 Google Scholar
- 23 Basu A. Economics of individualization in comparative effectiveness research and a basis for a patient-centered health care. J Health Econ 2011; 30: 549–559.
- 24 Sung L, Buckstein R, Doyle JJ, et al. Treatment options for patients with acute myeloid leukemia with a matched sibling donor: A decision analysis. Cancer 2003; 97: 592–600.
- 25 Sung L, Zaoutis T, Ullrich N, et al. Children's Oncology Group's 2012 Blueprint for Research: Cancer control and supportive care. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2012; (in press).
- 26 Llewellyn-Thomas HA. Investigating patients' preferences for different treatment options. Can J Nurs Res 1997; 29: 45–64.
- 27 Tomlinson D, Bartels U, Gammon J, et al. Chemotherapy versus supportive care alone in pediatric palliative care for cancer: Comparing the preferences of parents and health care professionals. CMAJ 2011; 183: E1252–E1258.
- 28 Tomlinson D, Bartels U, Hendershot E, et al. Factors affecting treatment choices in paediatric palliative care: Comparing parents and health professionals. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47: 2182–2187.
- 29 Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000; 320: 1530–1533.
- 30 Lancaster K. A new approach to consumer theory. J Polit Econ 1966; 74: 132–157.
- 31 Regier DA, Ryan M, Phimister E, et al. Bayesian and classical estimation of mixed logit: An application to genetic testing. J Health Econ 2009; 28: 598–610.
- 32 Sung L, Alibhai SM, Ethier MC, et al. Discrete choice experiment produced estimates of acceptable risks of therapeutic options in cancer patients with febrile neutropenia. J Clin Epidemiol 2012; 65: 627–634.
