Delay discounting and low-value care decision-making by primary care clinicians in a survey-based vignette experiment
Epling, J. W.; King, M. J.; Rockwell, M.; Tegge, A. N.; Hester, C. M.; Clay, T. L.; Callen, E. F.; Turner, J. K.; Stein, J.
Show abstract
Introduction: Primary care clinicians (PCC) commonly make decisions in the context of time delay and uncertainty. Delay discounting (DD) and probability discounting (PD) are cognitive biases related to delay and uncertainty that are minimally explored in PCC. We assessed DD and PD in PCC and evaluated their association with low-value care (LVC) decision-making. Methods: We administered a survey to PCC in a Southeastern U.S health system and within the American Academy of Family Physicians networks. The survey comprised standardized psychometric assessments of DD and PD and four LVC clinical vignettes. Outcomes included DD and PD discounting rates for two monetary rewards ($100 and $10,000) and ratings of LVC likelihood (0-100). We used regression analysis with model selection to evaluate the relationship between variables. Results: 225 PCC (89% physicians, 11% advanced practice providers) participated. Heterogeneity in DD and PD rates was observed. For the $10,000 reward, ln k(DD)= -6.80, IQR:-7.60--6.10) and ln h(PD)= 1.75, IQR:1.75-2.36). The reward amount impacted DD and PD in opposing directions (i.e., lower DD/higher PD rates for $10,000 vs. $100). LVC likelihood was highest for low-value antibiotics and lowest for low-value cervical cancer screening (median 20, IQR:10-40 and 0, IQR:0-10, respectively). Model selection revealed demographic associations with LVC likelihood, but no association with DD or PD. Conclusions: Consistent with effects previously reported in non-clinicians, PCC exhibited a range of DD and PD, which ranged by reward magnitude. Neither DD nor PD predicted vignette-based LVC likelihood. Further research should investigate actual clinical practice patterns and other LVC scenarios.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- What matters to patients?: a timely question for Value Based Care 93%
- Integrating Operant and Cognitive Behavioral Economics to Inform Infectious Disease Response: Prevention, Testing, and Vaccination in the COVID-19 Pandemic 92%
- Essential Indicators of Quality in Primary Care Settings: An Evidence-Based, Structured, Expert Approach 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Which factors should be included in triage? An online survey of the attitudes of the UK general public to pandemic triage dilemmas 92%
- Public acceptability of non-pharmaceutical interventions to control a pandemic in the United Kingdom: a discrete choice experiment 92%
- Acute Pain Pathways: protocol for a prospective cohort study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Measurement Matters: Changing Penalty Calculations under the Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program (HACRP) Cost Hospitals Millions 91%
- A System Dynamics Model for Effects of Workplace Violence and Clinician Burnout on Agitation Management in the Emergency Department 91%
- Differences in medication reconciliation interventions between six hospitals: a mixed method study 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Clarifying Values: An Updated and Expanded Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 92%
- A novel decision modeling framework for health policy analyses when outcomes are influenced by social and disease processes 90%
- Forecasting local surges in COVID-19 hospitalizations through adaptive decision tree classifiers 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Public Preferences for Social Distancing Behaviors to Mitigate the Spread of COVID-19: A Discrete Choice Experiment 93%
- Low adherence to existing model reporting guidelines by commonly used clinical prediction models 91%
- Characterizing Potential Conflicts of Interest Among UpToDate and DynaMed Content Contributors 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.