ArticleManagement science2018
Dynamic Learning of Patient Response Types: An Application to Treating Chronic Diseases.
Article in Management science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Population-Based Usage and Benefit of Digitally Collected Patient-Reported Outcomes and Experiences in Patients With Chronic Diseases: The PROMchronic Study Protocol.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Behavioral Analytics for Myopic Agents.European journal of operational research · 2023Article
- The optimization of the "UAV-vehicle" joint delivery route considering mountainous cities.PloS one · 2022Article
- Optimal cholesterol treatment plans and genetic testing strategies for cardiovascular diseases.Health care management science · 2021Article
- Behavioral Modeling in Weight Loss Interventions.European journal of operational research · 2019Article
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
Abstract
Currently available medication for treating many chronic diseases is often effective only for a subgroup of patients, and biomarkers accurately assessing whether an individual belongs to this subgroup typically do not exist. In such settings, physicians learn about the effectiveness of a drug primarily through experimentation, i.e., by initiating treatment and monitoring the patient's response. Precise guidelines for discontinuing treatment are often lacking or left entirely to the physician's discretion. We introduce a framework for developing adaptive, personalized treatments for such chronic diseases. Our model is based on a continuous-time, multi-armed bandit setting where drug effectiveness is assessed by aggregating information from several channels: by continuously monitoring the state of the patient, but also by (not) observing the occurrence of particular infrequent health events, such as relapses or disease flare-ups. Recognizing that the timing and severity of such events provides critical information for treatment decisions is a key point of departure in our framework compared with typical (bandit) models used in healthcare. We show that the model can be analyzed in closed form for several settings of interest, resulting in optimal policies that are intuitive and may have practical appeal. We illustrate the effectiveness of the methodology by developing a set of efficient treatment policies for multiple sclerosis, which we then use to benchmark several existing treatment guidelines.
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.