Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23999489›Full record

ArticleMedical care research and review : MCRR2014

Complexity, public reporting, and choice of doctors: a look inside the blackest box of consumer behavior.

Mark Schlesinger, David E Kanouse, Steven C Martino, Dale Shaller, Lise Rybowski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care research and review : MCRR, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Testing the effects on information use by older versus younger women of modality and narration style in a hospital report card.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  20. How do consumers respond when presented with novel doctor performance information? A multivariate regression analysis.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Mark SchlesingerYale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA mark.schlesinger@yale.edu.
David E KanouseRAND Health, Santa Monica, CA, USA.
Steven C MartinoRAND Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Dale ShallerShaller Consulting Group, Stillwater, MN, USA.
Lise RybowskiThe Severyn Group, Ashburn, VA, USA.

Funding

Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems CAHPS VU18HS016978 · AHRQ · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI CLEARY, PAUL D · 2007 to 2021
$20.3M
Continuation of Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems CAHPS IVU18HS016980 · AHRQ · RAND CORPORATION · PI HAYS, RONALD DALE · 2007 to 2016
$14.7M
AHRQ HHS 1U18HS016978AHRQ HHS U18 HS016978AHRQ HHS U18 HS016980AHRQ HHS UI18HS016980
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Health care consumers often make choices that are imperfectly informed and inconsistent with their expressed preferences. Past research suggests that these shortcomings become more pronounced as choices become more complex, through either additional options or more performance metrics. But it is unclear why this is true: Consumer choice remains a "black box" that research has scarcely illuminated. In this article, we identify four pathways through which complexity may impair consumer choice. We examine these pathways using data from an experiment in which consumers (hypothetically) selected a primary care physician. Some of the loss of decision quality accompanying more complex choice sets can be explained by consumers' skills and decision-making style, but even after accounting for these factors, complexity undermines the quality of decision making in ways that cannot be fully explained. We conclude by discussing implications for report designers, sponsors, and policy makers aspiring to promote consumer empowerment and health care quality.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorQuality of Health CareAccess to InformationAdultChoice BehaviorEmotionsHeuristicsHumansMiddle AgedPhysicians, Primary Carebounded rationalitychoiceconsumerismdecision stylesexperimentheuristics

Identifiers

PMID23999489
PMCPMC5444655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.