What does it mean to provide decision support to a responsible and competent expert?

IF 2.3 Q3 MANAGEMENT
Antoine Richard , Brice Mayag , François Talbot , Alexis Tsoukias , Yves Meinard
{"title":"What does it mean to provide decision support to a responsible and competent expert?","authors":"Antoine Richard ,&nbsp;Brice Mayag ,&nbsp;François Talbot ,&nbsp;Alexis Tsoukias ,&nbsp;Yves Meinard","doi":"10.1007/s40070-020-00116-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Decision support consists in helping a decision-maker to improve his/her decisions. However, clients requesting decision support are often themselves experts and are often taken by third parties and/or the general public to be responsible for the decisions they make. This predicament raises complex challenges for decision analysts, who have to avoid infringing upon the expertise and responsibility of the decision-maker. The case of diagnosis decision support in healthcare contexts is particularly illustrative. To support clinicians in their work and minimize the risk of medical error, various decision support systems have been developed, as part of information systems that are now ubiquitous in healthcare contexts. To develop, in collaboration with the hospitals of Lyon, a diagnostic decision support system for day-to-day customary consultations, we propose in this paper a critical analysis of current approaches to diagnostic decision support, which mainly consist in providing them with guidelines or even full-fledged diagnosis recommendations. We highlight that the use of such decision support systems by physicians raises responsibility issues, but also that it is at odds with the needs and constraints of customary consultations. We argue that the historical choice to favor guidelines or recommendations to physicians implies a very specific vision of what it means to support physicians, and we argue that the flaws of this vision partially explain why current diagnostic decision support systems are not accepted by physicians in their application to customary situations. Based on this analysis, we propose that decision support to physicians for customary cases should be deployed in an “adjustive” approach, which consists in providing physicians with the data on patients they need, when they need them, during consultations. The rationale articulated in this article has a more general bearing than clinical decision support and bears lessons for decision support activities in other contexts where decision-makers are competent and responsible experts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44104,"journal":{"name":"EURO Journal on Decision Processes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s40070-020-00116-7","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EURO Journal on Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2193943821001151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Decision support consists in helping a decision-maker to improve his/her decisions. However, clients requesting decision support are often themselves experts and are often taken by third parties and/or the general public to be responsible for the decisions they make. This predicament raises complex challenges for decision analysts, who have to avoid infringing upon the expertise and responsibility of the decision-maker. The case of diagnosis decision support in healthcare contexts is particularly illustrative. To support clinicians in their work and minimize the risk of medical error, various decision support systems have been developed, as part of information systems that are now ubiquitous in healthcare contexts. To develop, in collaboration with the hospitals of Lyon, a diagnostic decision support system for day-to-day customary consultations, we propose in this paper a critical analysis of current approaches to diagnostic decision support, which mainly consist in providing them with guidelines or even full-fledged diagnosis recommendations. We highlight that the use of such decision support systems by physicians raises responsibility issues, but also that it is at odds with the needs and constraints of customary consultations. We argue that the historical choice to favor guidelines or recommendations to physicians implies a very specific vision of what it means to support physicians, and we argue that the flaws of this vision partially explain why current diagnostic decision support systems are not accepted by physicians in their application to customary situations. Based on this analysis, we propose that decision support to physicians for customary cases should be deployed in an “adjustive” approach, which consists in providing physicians with the data on patients they need, when they need them, during consultations. The rationale articulated in this article has a more general bearing than clinical decision support and bears lessons for decision support activities in other contexts where decision-makers are competent and responsible experts.

向负责任和有能力的专家提供决策支持意味着什么?
决策支持包括帮助决策者改进他/她的决策。然而,要求决策支持的客户通常本身就是专家,并且通常由第三方和/或公众对他们所做的决策负责。这种困境给决策分析人员提出了复杂的挑战,他们必须避免侵犯决策者的专业知识和责任。医疗保健环境中的诊断决策支持案例尤其具有说明性。为了支持临床医生的工作并最大限度地减少医疗错误的风险,各种决策支持系统已经被开发出来,作为信息系统的一部分,现在在医疗保健环境中无处不在。为了与里昂的医院合作开发用于日常习惯咨询的诊断决策支持系统,我们在本文中建议对当前诊断决策支持方法进行批判性分析,这些方法主要包括为他们提供指导方针,甚至是全面的诊断建议。我们强调,医生使用这种决策支持系统会引起责任问题,但它也与习惯咨询的需求和限制不一致。我们认为,历史上倾向于向医生提供指导或建议的选择意味着对支持医生意味着什么有一种非常具体的看法,我们认为,这种看法的缺陷部分解释了为什么目前的诊断决策支持系统在应用于习惯情况时不被医生接受。基于这一分析,我们建议对医生的习惯病例的决策支持应该以一种“调整”的方式进行部署,即在医生需要的时候,在会诊期间向医生提供他们需要的患者数据。本文阐述的基本原理比临床决策支持具有更广泛的意义,并且对决策者是有能力和负责任的专家的其他情况下的决策支持活动具有借鉴意义。
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
15
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信