ArticleScientific reports2025
Deploying projected utility to predict health behaviour in health economics: a quantitative study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Expected utility is increasingly deployed as a predictor of health behaviour within the broader domain of health economics and health sciences in general. However, research shows that this concept only explains limited variance in health behaviour. This limited explained variance is often attributed to the questionable theoretical axioms underlying the concept. Due to these limitations it was hypothesised that the concept of utility should not be conceptualized in terms of preferences for future health states (expected utility), but as realistic approximations of future health states (projected utility). Therefore, this study examines whether deployment of projected utility separately or in combination with expected utility enhances predictions of health behaviour as compared to expected utility. Online questionnaires were disseminated among a nationally representative panel of Dutch citizens (N = 2,550). The questionnaire encompassed items capturing demographic characteristics alongside instruments measuring expected utility, projected utility and health behaviour. Data analysis entailed descriptive, reliability, validity and model statistics. The results suggest that projected utility has a larger significant direct effect on and explains more variance in health behaviour than expected utility. The results subsequently indicate that expected utility and projected utility combined have a larger significant direct effect on and explain more variance in health behaviour than each type of utility separately. Health economists, policy makers and other public health practitioners are well advised to at least consider the separate or even combined deployment of projected utility in health economics in order to enhance predictions of health behaviour.
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.