Medical decision-making under risk and uncertainty: Anesthetists' decision to proceed with surgery.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
Risk Analysis Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-21 DOI:10.1111/risa.70027
Zijing Yang, Yaniv Hanoch, Zvi Safra, Tigran Melkonyan, Olivera Potparic, James Palmer
{"title":"Medical decision-making under risk and uncertainty: Anesthetists' decision to proceed with surgery.","authors":"Zijing Yang, Yaniv Hanoch, Zvi Safra, Tigran Melkonyan, Olivera Potparic, James Palmer","doi":"10.1111/risa.70027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is a paucity of work examining anesthetists' willingness to proceed as attending anesthetists (hereafter, WTP) in response to different risky medical conditions. Earlier studies offer only a partial and indirect explanation as to why variations in WTP exist. We evaluated whether psychological factors of risk-taking tendencies, attitudes toward uncertainty, sense of regret, and demographic variables, particularly experience and gender, might clarify the disparities in an anesthetist's WTP. Anesthetists from two National Health Service Trusts in England (i.e., hospitals) viewed, in random order, three different realistic scenarios (representing low-, medium-, and high-risk cases) and were asked to indicate how likely they were to agree to proceed as the attending anesthetist. They also answered questions evaluating their risk-taking tendencies, comfort with uncertainty, and tendency to experience regret. Anesthetists varied in their WTP. Importantly, our data revealed that a sense of uncertainty and regret, but not a risk attitude, could help explain these variations. Female anesthetists were less likely to agree to proceed as attending anesthetists regardless of the level of risk or individual differences, but we found no relationship between levels of experience and WTP. Examining anesthetists' WTP in isolation provides an important but only partial picture. Gaining a better understanding of the factors that drive decision-making is vital for improving both training and practice. In particular, given the high proportion of women in anesthesia, the gender difference found in this study has important implications for anesthetic training and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":21472,"journal":{"name":"Risk Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"2771-2789"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12474527/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70027","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There is a paucity of work examining anesthetists' willingness to proceed as attending anesthetists (hereafter, WTP) in response to different risky medical conditions. Earlier studies offer only a partial and indirect explanation as to why variations in WTP exist. We evaluated whether psychological factors of risk-taking tendencies, attitudes toward uncertainty, sense of regret, and demographic variables, particularly experience and gender, might clarify the disparities in an anesthetist's WTP. Anesthetists from two National Health Service Trusts in England (i.e., hospitals) viewed, in random order, three different realistic scenarios (representing low-, medium-, and high-risk cases) and were asked to indicate how likely they were to agree to proceed as the attending anesthetist. They also answered questions evaluating their risk-taking tendencies, comfort with uncertainty, and tendency to experience regret. Anesthetists varied in their WTP. Importantly, our data revealed that a sense of uncertainty and regret, but not a risk attitude, could help explain these variations. Female anesthetists were less likely to agree to proceed as attending anesthetists regardless of the level of risk or individual differences, but we found no relationship between levels of experience and WTP. Examining anesthetists' WTP in isolation provides an important but only partial picture. Gaining a better understanding of the factors that drive decision-making is vital for improving both training and practice. In particular, given the high proportion of women in anesthesia, the gender difference found in this study has important implications for anesthetic training and practice.

风险和不确定性下的医疗决策:麻醉师进行手术的决定。
研究麻醉师是否愿意继续担任主治麻醉师(以下简称“主治麻醉师”)以应对不同的危险医疗状况的工作很少。早期的研究只提供了部分和间接的解释为什么WTP存在变化。我们评估了冒险倾向、对不确定性的态度、后悔感和人口变量等心理因素,特别是经验和性别,是否可以澄清麻醉师WTP的差异。来自英格兰两家国家卫生服务信托基金(即医院)的麻醉师以随机顺序观察了三种不同的现实情况(代表低、中、高风险病例),并被要求表明他们同意继续担任主治麻醉师的可能性有多大。他们还回答了一些问题,评估他们的冒险倾向、对不确定性的适应程度以及后悔的倾向。麻醉师的WTP各不相同。重要的是,我们的数据显示,不确定感和后悔感,而不是冒险态度,可以帮助解释这些差异。无论风险水平或个体差异如何,女性麻醉师不太可能同意继续担任主治麻醉师,但我们发现经验水平与WTP之间没有关系。单独检查麻醉师的WTP提供了一个重要但只是部分的图像。更好地理解驱动决策的因素对于提高培训和实践都至关重要。特别是,鉴于女性在麻醉中的比例很高,本研究中发现的性别差异对麻醉培训和实践具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Risk Analysis
Risk Analysis 数学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
10.50%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4.2 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the Society for Risk Analysis, Risk Analysis is ranked among the top 10 journals in the ISI Journal Citation Reports under the social sciences, mathematical methods category, and provides a focal point for new developments in the field of risk analysis. This international peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing critical empirical research and commentaries dealing with risk issues. The topics covered include: • Human health and safety risks • Microbial risks • Engineering • Mathematical modeling • Risk characterization • Risk communication • Risk management and decision-making • Risk perception, acceptability, and ethics • Laws and regulatory policy • Ecological risks.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信