Health decision making

Lynchpin of evidence-based practice

Bonnie Spring*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

29 Citations (Scopus)

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.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)866-874
Number of pages9
JournalMedical Decision Making
Volume28
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2008

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Practice
Decision Making
Health
Intuition
Patient Preference
Patient Compliance
Life Style
Public Health
Weights and Measures

Keywords

  • Clinical competence
  • Decision making
  • Decision theory
  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Evidence-based practice
  • Practice guidelines clinical psychology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

@article{f6f6798961ba4597bc59f5b03098cfbc,
title = "Health decision making: Lynchpin of evidence-based practice",
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.",
keywords = "Clinical competence, Decision making, Decision theory, Evidence-based medicine, Evidence-based practice, Practice guidelines clinical psychology",
author = "Bonnie Spring",
year = "2008",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0272989X08326146",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "866--874",
journal = "Medical Decision Making",
issn = "0272-989X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "6",

}

Health decision making : Lynchpin of evidence-based practice. / Spring, Bonnie.

In: Medical Decision Making, Vol. 28, No. 6, 01.11.2008, p. 866-874.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Health decision making

T2 - Lynchpin of evidence-based practice

AU - Spring, Bonnie

PY - 2008/11/1

Y1 - 2008/11/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Clinical competence

KW - Decision making

KW - Decision theory

KW - Evidence-based medicine

KW - Evidence-based practice

KW - Practice guidelines clinical psychology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=57049137803&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=57049137803&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0272989X08326146

DO - 10.1177/0272989X08326146

M3 - Review article

VL - 28

SP - 866

EP - 874

JO - Medical Decision Making

JF - Medical Decision Making

SN - 0272-989X

IS - 6

ER -