Previous research has indicated that decision making is accompanied by an increase in the coherence of assessments of the factors related to the decision alternatives. In the present study, the authors investigated whether this coherence shift is obtained before people commit to a decision, and whether it is obtained in the course of a number of other processing tasks. College students were presented with a complex legal case involving multiple conflicting arguments. Participants rated agreement with the individual arguments in isolation before seeing the case and after processing it under various initial sets, including playing the role of a judge assigned to decide the case. Coherence shifts were observed when participants were instructed to delay making the decision (Experiment 1), to memorize the case (Experiment 2), and to comprehend the case (Experiment 3). The findings support the hypothesis that a coherence-generating mechanism operates in a variety of processing tasks, including decision making.Many decisions people are faced with require the integration of multiple inferences. Tasks such as deciding which job offer to accept, or what candidate to support in an election, involve sets of inferences that tend to be ambiguous, contradictory, and complex. Holyoak and Simon (1999) examined such inference-based decision making in a laboratory analog of judicial decision making, in which college students were asked to render a verdict in a complex legal case. The principal finding was that the decision-making process was accompanied by a systematic change in the evaluation of the inferences toward a pattern of coherence with the emerging decision. Assessments of inferences spread apart increasingly, with those supporting the chosen decision growing stronger as those supporting the rejected alternative waned. This shifting of inferences suggests that the participants' reasoning processes operated bidirectionally: The decisions seemed to be based on the inferences made from the provided information, and at the same time, the emerging decisions worked backwards to alter the strength of the inferences, yielding even stronger support for the decision. Evidence of this bidirectional influence was provided by a manipulation of the favorability of 1 of the 12 inferences inDan Simon, School of Law, University of Southern California; Lien B. Pham, Quang A. Le, and Keith J. Holyoak, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles.A preliminary report of the findings was presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Los Angeles, November 1999. This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grants SES-0080424 and SES-0080375.This article benefited from the comments of Tom Lyon, Steve Read, David Boninger, and Jay Russo. We thank Andre Der-Avakian, Mercedes Barajas, Vera Cha, Humberto Iglesias, Mimi Lin, Diana Lucero, Annahita Palar, Suzette Viemes, and Kristine Vuong for assisting in running the experiments and Sean McAuliffe for preparing figures.Correspondence concerning thi...
Background: Stroke reduction with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in atrial fibrillation (AF) is dependent on adherence and persistence in the real-world setting. Individual study estimates of DOAC adherence/persistence rates have been discordant. Our aims were to characterize real-world observational evidence for DOAC adherence/persistence and evaluate associated clinical outcomes in patients with AF. Methods and Results: PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL were searched from inception to June 2018. Observational studies that reported real-world DOAC adherence/persistence in patients with AF were included. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Meta-analyses for pooled estimates were performed using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models. Outcomes included DOAC mean proportion of days covered or medication possession ratio, proportion of good adherence (proportion of days covered/medication possession ratio ≥80%), persistence, DOAC versus vitamin K antagonists persistence, and clinical outcomes associated with nonadherence/nonpersistence. Forty-eight observational studies with 594 784 unique patients with AF (59% male; mean age 71 years) were included. The overall pooled mean proportion of days covered/medication possession ratio was 77% (95% CI, 75%–80%), proportion of patients with good adherence was 66% (95% CI, 63%–70%), and proportion persistent was 69% (95% CI, 65%–72%). The pooled proportion of patients with good adherence was 71% (95% CI, 64%–78%) for apixaban, 60% (95% CI, 52%–68%) for dabigatran, and 70% (95% CI, 64%–75%) for rivaroxaban. Similar patterns were found for pooled persistence by agent. The pooled persistence was higher with DOACs than vitamin K antagonists (odds ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.12–.86]). DOAC nonadherence was associated with an increased risk of stroke (hazard ratio, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.06–1.81]). Conclusions: Suboptimal adherence and persistence to DOACs was common in patients with AF, with 1 in 3 patients adhering to their DOAC <80% of the time, which was associated with poor clinical outcomes in nonadherent patients. Although it is convenient that DOACs do not require laboratory monitoring, greater effort in monitoring for and interventions to prevent nonadherence may be necessary to optimize stroke prevention. Increased clinician awareness of DOAC nonadherence may help identify at-risk patients.
Bayesian networks provide a new robust and natural approach to map health status responses into health utility measures for health economic evaluations.
ObjectiveTo determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the health-utility measures EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) and Quality of Well Being Self-Administered (QWB-SA) Scale in PTSD patients.Research design and methodsTwo hundred patients aged 18 to 65 years with PTSD enrolled in a doubly randomized preference trial (DRPT) examining the treatment and treatment-preference effects between cognitive behavioral therapy and pharmacotherapy with sertraline and completed the EQ-5D and QWB-SA at baseline and 10-week post-treatment. The anchor-based methods utilized a Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity. We regressed the changes in EQ-5D and QWB-SA scores on changes in the anchors using ordinary least squares regression. The slopes (beta coefficients) were the rates of change in the anchors as functions of change in EQ-5D and QWB, which represent our estimates of MCID. In addition, we performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to examine the relationship between the changes in EQ-5D and QWB-SA scores and treatment-response status. The MCIDs were estimated from the ROC curve where they best discriminate between treatment responders and non-responders. The distribution-based methods used small to moderate effect size in terms of 0.2 and 0.5 of standard deviation of the pre-treatment EQ-5D and QWB-SA scores.ResultsThe anchor-based methods estimated the MCID ranges of 0.05 to 0.08 for the EQ-5D and 0.03 to 0.05 for the QWB. The MCID ranges were higher with the distribution-based methods, ranging from 0.04 to 0.10 for the EQ-5D and 0.02 to 0.05 for the QWB-SA.ConclusionsThe established MCID ranges of EQ-5D and QWB-SA can be a useful tool in assessing meaningful changes in patient’s quality of life for researchers and clinicians, and assisting health-policy makers to make informing decision in mental health treatment.Clinical trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov; Identifier: NCT00127673.
Our analysis of current evidence suggests that RT-CGM and P-CGM are effective in improving HbA1c in adults with type 2 diabetes. Due to insufficient evidence, it is premature to form conclusions on the effectiveness of FGM. Future multicenter trials accessing the effectiveness of CGM as well as safety and cost-effectiveness may be necessary.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.