Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 4/2010

01-12-2010 | Practical Application

Multi-Criteria Clinical Decision Support

A Primer on the Use of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods to Promote Evidence-Based, Patient-Centered Healthcare

Author: James G. Dolan, MD

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 4/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Current models of healthcare quality recommend that patient management decisions be evidence based and patient centered. Evidence-based decisions require a thorough understanding of current information regarding the natural history of disease and the anticipated outcomes of different management options. Patient-centered decisions incorporate patient preferences, values, and unique personal circumstances in the decision-making process, and actively involve both patients and healthcare providers as much as possible. Fundamentally, therefore, evidence-based, patient-centered decisions are multi-dimensional and typically involve multiple decision makers.
Advances in the decision sciences have led to the development of a number of multiple-criteria decision-making methods. These multi-criteria methods are designed to help people make better choices when faced with complex decisions involving several dimensions. They are especially helpful when there is a need to combine ‘hard data’ with subjective preferences, to make trade-offs between desired outcomes, and to involve multiple decision makers. Evidence-based, patient-centered clinical decision making has all of these characteristics. This close match suggests that clinical decision-support systems based on multi-criteria decision-making techniques have the potential to enable patients and providers to carry out the tasks required to implement evidence-based, patient-centered care effectively and efficiently in clinical settings.
The goal of this article is to give readers a general introduction to the range of multi-criteria methods available and show how they could be used to support clinical decision making. Methods discussed include the balance sheet, the ‘even swap’ method, ordinal ranking methods, direct weighting methods, multi-attribute decision analysis, and the analytic hierarchy process.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Institute of Medicine. Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001 Institute of Medicine. Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2001
2.
go back to reference Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. National healthcare quality report, 2008: key themes from the national healthcare quality report [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ahrq.gov/qual/nhqr08/Key.htm [Accessed 2010 Aug 11] Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. National healthcare quality report, 2008: key themes from the national healthcare quality report [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​ahrq.​gov/​qual/​nhqr08/​Key.​htm [Accessed 2010 Aug 11]
3.
go back to reference Elwyn G, Edwards A, Gwyn R, et al. Towards a feasible model for shared decision making: focus group study with general practice registrars. BMJ 1999; 319: 753–6PubMedCrossRef Elwyn G, Edwards A, Gwyn R, et al. Towards a feasible model for shared decision making: focus group study with general practice registrars. BMJ 1999; 319: 753–6PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness: the Chronic Care model, part 2. JAMA 2002; 288(15): 1909–14PubMedCrossRef Bodenheimer T, Wagner EH, Grumbach K. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness: the Chronic Care model, part 2. JAMA 2002; 288(15): 1909–14PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference O’Connor AM, Wennberg JE, Legare F, et al. Toward the ‘tipping point’: decision aids and informed patient choice. Health Aff 2007; 26(3): 716–25CrossRef O’Connor AM, Wennberg JE, Legare F, et al. Toward the ‘tipping point’: decision aids and informed patient choice. Health Aff 2007; 26(3): 716–25CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Belton V, Stewart TJ. Multiple criteria decision analysis. Boston (MA): Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002CrossRef Belton V, Stewart TJ. Multiple criteria decision analysis. Boston (MA): Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M. Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. New York: Springer, 2005 Figueira J, Greco S, Ehrgott M. Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. New York: Springer, 2005
8.
go back to reference Wallenius J, Dyer JS, Fishburn PC, et al. Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Manage Sci 2008; 54(7): 1336–49CrossRef Wallenius J, Dyer JS, Fishburn PC, et al. Multiple criteria decision making, multiattribute utility theory: recent accomplishments and what lies ahead. Manage Sci 2008; 54(7): 1336–49CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Baltussen R, Niessen L. Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2006; 4(1): 14–14PubMedCrossRef Baltussen R, Niessen L. Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2006; 4(1): 14–14PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Goetghebeur MM, Wagner M, Khoury H, et al. Evidence and Value: Impact on DEcisionMaking. The EVIDEM framework and potential applications. BMC Health Serv Res 2008; 8: 270PubMedCrossRef Goetghebeur MM, Wagner M, Khoury H, et al. Evidence and Value: Impact on DEcisionMaking. The EVIDEM framework and potential applications. BMC Health Serv Res 2008; 8: 270PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Liberatore MJ, Nydick RL. The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 2008; 189(1): 194–207CrossRef Liberatore MJ, Nydick RL. The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 2008; 189(1): 194–207CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Sloane EB, Liberatore MJ, Nydick RL. Medical decision support using the analytic hierarchy process. J Healthc Inf Manag 2002; 16(4): 38–43PubMed Sloane EB, Liberatore MJ, Nydick RL. Medical decision support using the analytic hierarchy process. J Healthc Inf Manag 2002; 16(4): 38–43PubMed
13.
go back to reference Sloane EB, Liberatore MJ, Nydick RL, et al. Using the analytic hierarchy process as a clinical engineering tool to facilitate an iterative, multidisciplinary, microeconomic health technology assessment. Computers Operations Res 2003; 30(10): 1447–65CrossRef Sloane EB, Liberatore MJ, Nydick RL, et al. Using the analytic hierarchy process as a clinical engineering tool to facilitate an iterative, multidisciplinary, microeconomic health technology assessment. Computers Operations Res 2003; 30(10): 1447–65CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Pieterse AH, Berkers F, Baas-Thijssen MC, et al. Adaptive conjoint analysis as individual preference assessment tool: feasibility through the internet and reliability of preferences. Patient Educ Counsel 2010; 78(2): 224–33CrossRef Pieterse AH, Berkers F, Baas-Thijssen MC, et al. Adaptive conjoint analysis as individual preference assessment tool: feasibility through the internet and reliability of preferences. Patient Educ Counsel 2010; 78(2): 224–33CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Ahmed SF, Smith WA, Blamires C. Facilitating and understanding the family’s choice of injection device for growth hormone therapy by using conjoint analysis. Arch Dis Child 2008; 93(2): 110–4PubMedCrossRef Ahmed SF, Smith WA, Blamires C. Facilitating and understanding the family’s choice of injection device for growth hormone therapy by using conjoint analysis. Arch Dis Child 2008; 93(2): 110–4PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Fisher K, Orkin F, Frazer C. Utilizing conjoint analysis to explicate health care decision making by emergency department nurses: a feasibility study. Appl Nurs Res 2010; 23(1): 30–5PubMedCrossRef Fisher K, Orkin F, Frazer C. Utilizing conjoint analysis to explicate health care decision making by emergency department nurses: a feasibility study. Appl Nurs Res 2010; 23(1): 30–5PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000; 320(7248): 1530–3PubMedCrossRef Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ 2000; 320(7248): 1530–3PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Breslin M, Mullan RJ, Montori VM. The design of a decision aid about diabetes medications for use during the consultation with patients with type 2 diabetes. Patient Educ Counsel 2008; 73(3): 465–72CrossRef Breslin M, Mullan RJ, Montori VM. The design of a decision aid about diabetes medications for use during the consultation with patients with type 2 diabetes. Patient Educ Counsel 2008; 73(3): 465–72CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Few S. Information dashboard design: the effective visual communication of data. Sebastopol (CA): O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2006 Few S. Information dashboard design: the effective visual communication of data. Sebastopol (CA): O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2006
21.
go back to reference Mullan RJ, Montori VM, Shah ND, et al. The diabetes mellitus medication choice decision aid: a randomized trial. Arch Int Med 2009; 169(17): 1560–8CrossRef Mullan RJ, Montori VM, Shah ND, et al. The diabetes mellitus medication choice decision aid: a randomized trial. Arch Int Med 2009; 169(17): 1560–8CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Marewski JN, Gaissmaier W, Gigerenzer G. Good judgments do not require complex cognition. Cogn Process 2010 May; 11(2): 103–21PubMedCrossRef Marewski JN, Gaissmaier W, Gigerenzer G. Good judgments do not require complex cognition. Cogn Process 2010 May; 11(2): 103–21PubMedCrossRef
23.
24.
go back to reference Dougherty MR, Franco-Watkins AM, Thomas R. Psychological plausibility of the theory of probabilistic mental models and the fast and frugal heuristics. Psychol Rev 2008; 115(1): 199–213PubMedCrossRef Dougherty MR, Franco-Watkins AM, Thomas R. Psychological plausibility of the theory of probabilistic mental models and the fast and frugal heuristics. Psychol Rev 2008; 115(1): 199–213PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Hastie R, Dawes RM. Rational choice in an uncertain world. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, Inc., 2001 Hastie R, Dawes RM. Rational choice in an uncertain world. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications, Inc., 2001
26.
go back to reference Hammond JS, Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Even swaps: a rational method for making trade-offs. Harv Bus Rev 1998; 76(2): 137–8, 143–8, 150PubMed Hammond JS, Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Even swaps: a rational method for making trade-offs. Harv Bus Rev 1998; 76(2): 137–8, 143–8, 150PubMed
27.
go back to reference Hammond JS, Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Smart choices: a practical guide to making better decisions. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Press, 1999 Hammond JS, Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Smart choices: a practical guide to making better decisions. Boston (MA): Harvard Business School Press, 1999
28.
go back to reference Mustajoki J, Hamalainen RP. Smart-Swaps: a decision support system for multicriteria decision analysis with the even swaps method. Decis Support Syst 2007; 44: 313–25CrossRef Mustajoki J, Hamalainen RP. Smart-Swaps: a decision support system for multicriteria decision analysis with the even swaps method. Decis Support Syst 2007; 44: 313–25CrossRef
29.
go back to reference SMART-SWAPS: smart choices with the even swaps method [online]. Available from URL: http://www.smart-swaps.hut.fi/ [Accessed 2010 Jul 29] SMART-SWAPS: smart choices with the even swaps method [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​smart-swaps.​hut.​fi/​ [Accessed 2010 Jul 29]
30.
go back to reference McCaffrey JD. Using the Multi-Attribute Global Inference of Quality (MAGIQ) technique for software testing. Sixth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations; 2009 Apr 27–29; Las Vegas (NV) McCaffrey JD. Using the Multi-Attribute Global Inference of Quality (MAGIQ) technique for software testing. Sixth International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations; 2009 Apr 27–29; Las Vegas (NV)
31.
go back to reference Edwards W, Barron FH. SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement. Organizational Behavior Hum Decis Processes 1994; 60(3): 306–25CrossRef Edwards W, Barron FH. SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multiattribute utility measurement. Organizational Behavior Hum Decis Processes 1994; 60(3): 306–25CrossRef
32.
go back to reference O’Connor AM, Tugwell P, Wells GA, et al. A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Educ Couns 1998; 33(3): 267–79PubMedCrossRef O’Connor AM, Tugwell P, Wells GA, et al. A decision aid for women considering hormone therapy after menopause: decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Educ Couns 1998; 33(3): 267–79PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Man-Son-Hing M, Laupacis A, O’Connor AM, et al. Development of a decision aid for patients with atrial fibrillation who are considering antithrombotic therapy. J Gen Int Med 2000; 15(10): 723–30CrossRef Man-Son-Hing M, Laupacis A, O’Connor AM, et al. Development of a decision aid for patients with atrial fibrillation who are considering antithrombotic therapy. J Gen Int Med 2000; 15(10): 723–30CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Masya LM, Young JM, Solomon MJ, et al. Preferences for outcomes of treatment for rectal cancer: patient and clinician utilities and their application in an interactive computer-based decision aid. Dis Colon Rectum 2009; 52(12): 1994–2002PubMedCrossRef Masya LM, Young JM, Solomon MJ, et al. Preferences for outcomes of treatment for rectal cancer: patient and clinician utilities and their application in an interactive computer-based decision aid. Dis Colon Rectum 2009; 52(12): 1994–2002PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference WEB-HIPRE: global decision support [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hipre.hut.fi/ [Accessed 2010 Jul 29] WEB-HIPRE: global decision support [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​hipre.​hut.​fi/​ [Accessed 2010 Jul 29]
36.
go back to reference café Annalisa [online]. Available from URL: http://www. cafeannalisa.org.uk/index.php [Accessed 2010 Jul 29] café Annalisa [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​ cafeannalisa.org.uk/index.php [Accessed 2010 Jul 29]
37.
go back to reference Von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986 Von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986
38.
go back to reference de Bock GH, Reijneveld SA, van Houwelingen JC, et al. Multiattribute utility scores for predicting family physicians’ decisions regarding sinusitis. Med Decis Making 1999; 19 (Jan–Mar): 58–65PubMedCrossRef de Bock GH, Reijneveld SA, van Houwelingen JC, et al. Multiattribute utility scores for predicting family physicians’ decisions regarding sinusitis. Med Decis Making 1999; 19 (Jan–Mar): 58–65PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Forman EH, Gass SI. The analytic hierarchy process: an exposition. Oper Res 2001; 49: 469–86CrossRef Forman EH, Gass SI. The analytic hierarchy process: an exposition. Oper Res 2001; 49: 469–86CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Sato J. Comparison between multiple-choice and analytic hierarchy process: measuring human perception. Int Trans Oper Res 2004; 11(1): 77–86CrossRef Sato J. Comparison between multiple-choice and analytic hierarchy process: measuring human perception. Int Trans Oper Res 2004; 11(1): 77–86CrossRef
41.
go back to reference Katsumura Y, Yasunaga H, Imamura T, et al. Relationship between risk information on total colonoscopy and patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening options: analysis using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. BMC Health Serv Res 2008; 8: 106PubMedCrossRef Katsumura Y, Yasunaga H, Imamura T, et al. Relationship between risk information on total colonoscopy and patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening options: analysis using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. BMC Health Serv Res 2008; 8: 106PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Dolan JG, Isselhardt Jr BJ, Cappuccio JD. The analytic hierarchy process in medical decision making: a tutorial. Med Decis Making 1989; 9(1): 40–50PubMedCrossRef Dolan JG, Isselhardt Jr BJ, Cappuccio JD. The analytic hierarchy process in medical decision making: a tutorial. Med Decis Making 1989; 9(1): 40–50PubMedCrossRef
43.
go back to reference Saaty TL. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 1990; 48(1): 9–26CrossRef Saaty TL. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 1990; 48(1): 9–26CrossRef
44.
go back to reference Saaty TL. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 1994; 24: 19–43CrossRef Saaty TL. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. Interfaces 1994; 24: 19–43CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Saaty TL. Decision making for leaders. Pittsburgh (PA): RWS Publications, 2001 Saaty TL. Decision making for leaders. Pittsburgh (PA): RWS Publications, 2001
46.
go back to reference Gass SI. Model world: when is a number a number? Interfaces 2001; 31(5): 93–103 Gass SI. Model world: when is a number a number? Interfaces 2001; 31(5): 93–103
47.
go back to reference Super Decisions Software for Decision-Making [online]. Available from URL: http://www.superdecisions.com [Accessed 2010 Jul 29] Super Decisions Software for Decision-Making [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​superdecisions.​com [Accessed 2010 Jul 29]
Metadata
Title
Multi-Criteria Clinical Decision Support
A Primer on the Use of Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Methods to Promote Evidence-Based, Patient-Centered Healthcare
Author
James G. Dolan, MD
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 4/2010
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/11539470-000000000-00000

Other articles of this Issue 4/2010

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 4/2010 Go to the issue

Pioneer Profile

Deborah Marshall, PhD

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgment

Original Research Article

Analysis of Patients’ Preferences

Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discuss last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.