ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2010
A regret theory approach to decision curve analysis: a novel method for eliciting decision makers' preferences and decision-making.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Development and validation of a nomogram to predict cancer-specific survival in elderly patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma: a population-based study.BMC geriatrics · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Linking Minimally Important Differences (MID) and Acceptable Regret to Elicit Values and Preferences in Health Decision Models.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- How to determine the optimal duration of anticoagulation for VTE: an evidence-based decision-analytical approach.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Additional Investigations and Referrals by Primary Care Physicians in Uncertain Clinical Situations: Cross-Sectional Study Using Virtual Patient-Based Scenarios.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Article
- Weighted Brier Score - an Overall Summary Measure for Risk Prediction Models with Clinical Utility Consideration.Statistics in biosciences · 2025Article
- Diagnostic accuracy differences in detecting wound maceration between humans and artificial intelligence: the role of human expertise revisited.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Chinese influence in Africa by integrated regret theory and multi-criteria decision analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
- Decision threshold models in medical decision making: a scoping literature review.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- From pre-test and post-test probabilities to medical decision making.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2024Article
- An internally and externally validated nomogram for predicting cancer-specific survival in octogenarians after radical resection for colorectal cancer.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2024Article
- Ordinary defensive medicine: in the shadows of general practitioners' postures toward (over-)medicalisation.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2024Article
- Commentary: Immune cell infiltration and prognostic index in cervical cancer: insights from metabolism-related differential genes.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Selective prediction for extracting unstructured clinical data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- Decision curve analysis: confidence intervals and hypothesis testing for net benefit.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2023Article
- Clinical utility gains from incorporating comorbidity and geographic location information into risk estimation equations for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2023Article
- Making Decisions When no Further Diagnostic Testing is Available (Expected Regret Theory Threshold Model).Cancer treatment and research · 2023Article
- Tailored Bayes: a risk modeling framework under unequal misclassification costs.Biostatistics (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDecision curve analysis (DCA) has been proposed as an alternative method for evaluation of diagnostic tests, prediction models, and molecular markers. However, DCA is based on expected utility theory, which has been routinely violated by decision makers. Decision-making is governed by intuition (system 1), and analytical, deliberative process (system 2), thus, rational decision-making should reflect both formal principles of rationality and intuition about good decisions. We use the cognitive emotion of regret to serve as a link between systems 1 and 2 and to reformulate DCA.
methodsFirst, we analysed a classic decision tree describing three decision alternatives: treat, do not treat, and treat or no treat based on a predictive model. We then computed the expected regret for each of these alternatives as the difference between the utility of the action taken and the utility of the action that, in retrospect, should have been taken. For any pair of strategies, we measure the difference in net expected regret. Finally, we employ the concept of acceptable regret to identify the circumstances under which a potentially wrong strategy is tolerable to a decision-maker.
resultsWe developed a novel dual visual analog scale to describe the relationship between regret associated with "omissions" (e.g. failure to treat) vs. "commissions" (e.g. treating unnecessary) and decision maker's preferences as expressed in terms of threshold probability. We then proved that the Net Expected Regret Difference, first presented in this paper, is equivalent to net benefits as described in the original DCA. Based on the concept of acceptable regret we identified the circumstances under which a decision maker tolerates a potentially wrong decision and expressed it in terms of probability of disease.
conclusionsWe present a novel method for eliciting decision maker's preferences and an alternative derivation of DCA based on regret theory. Our approach may be intuitively more appealing to a decision-maker, particularly in those clinical situations when the best management option is the one associated with the least amount of regret (e.g. diagnosis and treatment of advanced cancer, etc).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.