Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Medical Decision Making
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0272989X08327330v1
29/3/380    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Moreira, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ende, J. V. d.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Moreira, J.
Right arrow Articles by Ende, J. V. d.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Article

Weighing Harm in Therapeutic Decisions of Smear-Negative Pulmonary Tuberculosis: A Multicountry Survey

Juan Moreira*, Bettina Bisig, Petronille Muwawenimana, Paulin Basinga, Zeno Bisoffi, Frank Haegeman, Panduru Kishore, and Jef Van den Ende

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: jmoreira{at}itg.be.


   Abstract
Purpose. To relate the intuitive weight of harm by commission and harm by omission in therapeutic decisions for pulmonary tuberculosis, and to compare it with a weight based on probabilities. Methods. Clinicians were asked for an estimation of probabilities related with the outcome of treated and nontreated pulmonary tuberculosis and for the toll of wrong decisions. Three ratios of the weight of forgoing a treatment in false-negative patients against the weight of treating false-positives were calculated. The first was based on intuitive estimations, whereas the second and third were based on calculated, either through intuitive estimations of probabilities or through literature data. The association between experience and the difference between the intuitive and the calculated ratios was assessed. Results. Eighty-one participants from Ecuador, Laos, Nepal, and Rwanda responded. The ratio of intuitive weights was 2.0 (interquartile range [IQR], 1.0–4.0) and the ratio of calculated weights based on intuitive probabilities was 64 (IQR, 25.0–169.6; P < 0.001). The ratio of calculated weight based on literature probabilities was 30 (IQR, 17.9–59.2). No association (R2 = 0.03) was found between experience and accuracy in estimating the weight of errors. Conclusion. The weight of a false negative is more important than the weight of a false positive for therapeutic decisions in pulmonary tuberculosis. The ratio of the intuitively estimated weights was much lower than the calculation based on intuitively estimated influencing factors. Clinicians were accurate in estimating probabilities but failed to incorporate them into therapeutic decisions.

First published on February 17, 2009, doi:10.1177/0272989X08327330

Medical Decision Making 2009;29:380.

A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2009


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?