This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Asch, D. A. Articles by Hershey, J. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Asch, D. A. Articles by Hershey, J. C. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Knowing for the Sake of Knowing

The Value of Prognostic Information

James P. Patton, MD, MBA

John C. Hershey, PhD

In evaluating diagnostic tests, traditional methods in decision analysis often emphasize how the results of the test will or will not affect patient management. Clinicians are advised to avoid testing if the results will not alter treatment strategy or other management plans. But patients may be interested in the prognostic information that testing provides even if it is not used to guide treatment. The authors present a model that defines this prognostic information as the expected deviation from the prior probability of disease. The model generates utility functions that are curvilinear over prior probabilities. Whereas the traditional threshold ap proach to medical decision making produces at most three zones of management strategy (withhold, test, and treat), the incorporation of prognostic information into threshold analysis produces two additional zones (test but withhold anyway, and test but treat anyway). Con ditions under which one or both of these additional zones will appear are described. The model justifies the practice of performing tests that cannot alter management plans; it explains the unwillingness of some patients to undergo diagnostic testing when they fear unwanted results; and it provides a method for quantifying the sensitive nature of confidential tests. The model is illustrated using the antibody test for the Smith antigen. This test has a high specificity but a low sensitivity for lupus erythematosus. Clinicians may use the test because a positive result will support their prior suspicion of disease even though they may not change their management strategy if the test result is negative. The advantage of testing in this setting lies in the test's potential for establishing with virtual certainty that the disease is present. Thus, the test is valued for the prognostic information it provides apart from its effect on patient management. Key words: confidentiality; decision making; diagnostic tests; in formation theory; privacy; probability; prognosis; utility analysis. (Med Decis Making 1990;10:47-57)

Medical Decision Making, Vol. 10, No. 1, 47-57 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X9001000108


CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. Sassi and M. McKee Do clinicians always maximize patient outcomes? A conjoint analysis of preferences for carotid artery testing J Health Serv Res Policy, April 1, 2008; 13(2): 61 - 66. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. I. Mushlin, L. M. Kern, M. Paris, D. R. Lambert, and G. Williams The Value of Diagnostic Information to Patients with Chest Pain Suggestive of Coronary Artery Disease Med Decis Making, March 1, 2005; 25(2): 149 - 157. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Sonnenberg and N. Vakil The Benefit of Negative Tests in Non-Ulcer Dyspepsia Med Decis Making, June 1, 2002; 22(3): 199 - 207. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. A. Redelmeier, E. Shafir, and P. S. Aujla The Beguiling Pursuit of More Information Med Decis Making, October 1, 2001; 21(5): 376 - 381. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Shiloh, R. Ben-Sinai, and G. Keinan Effects of Controllability, Predictability, and Information-Seeking Style on Interest in Predictive Genetic Testing Pers Soc Psychol Bull, October 1, 1999; 25(10): 1187 - 1195. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. A. Benish Relative Entropy as a Measure of Diagnostic Information Med Decis Making, April 1, 1999; 19(2): 202 - 206. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. R. Rovner Laboratory Testing May Not Glitter Like Gold Med Decis Making, January 1, 1998; 18(1): 32 - 33. [PDF]

				M. L. DeKay and D. A. Asch Offensive Testing--the Balancing Act, the Evil Twin, and the Pure Play Med Decis Making, January 1, 1998; 18(1): 35 - 36. [PDF]

				K. G.M. Moons, T. Stijnen, B. C. Michel, H. R. Buller, G.-A. Van Es, D. E. Grobbee, and J. D. F. Habbema Application of Treatment Thresholds to Diagnostic-test Evaluation: An Alternative to the Comparison of Areas under Receiver Operating Characteristic Curves Med Decis Making, October 1, 1997; 17(4): 447 - 454. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M.-M. Chren, H. M. Lazarus, R. A. Salata, and C. S. Landefeld Cultures of Skin Biopsy Tissue From Immunocompromised Patients With Cancer and Rashes Arch Dermatol, May 1, 1995; 131(5): 552 - 555. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M.-M. Chren, H. M. Lazarus, D. R. Bickers, and C. S. Landefeld Rashes in Immunocompromised Cancer Patients: The Diagnostic Yield of Skin Biopsy and Its Effects on Therapy Arch Dermatol, February 1, 1993; 129(2): 175 - 181. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Somoza and D. Mossman Comparing and Optimizing Diagnostic Tests: An Information-theoretical Approach Med Decis Making, August 1, 1992; 12(3): 179 - 188. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. M. Singal, J. R. Hedges, and P. A. Succop Efficacy of the Stat Serum Electrolyte Panel in the Management of Older Emergency Patients Med Decis Making, February 1, 1992; 12(1): 52 - 59. [Abstract] [PDF]

				G. A. Diamond Point of Information Med Decis Making, February 1, 1991; 11(1): 42 - 44. [PDF]

				D. A. Asch, J. P. Patton, and J. C. Hershey Prognostic Information versus Accuracy: Once More with Meaning Med Decis Making, February 1, 1991; 11(1): 45 - 47. [PDF]