Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Jun;13(2):139-47.
doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00572.x. Epub 2009 Sep 9.

Deliberation before determination: the definition and evaluation of good decision making

Affiliations

Deliberation before determination: the definition and evaluation of good decision making

Glyn Elwyn et al. Health Expect. 2010 Jun.

Abstract

Objectives: In this article, we examine definitions of suggested approaches to measure the concept of good decisions, highlight the ways in which they converge, and explain why we have concerns about their emphasis on post-hoc estimations and post-decisional outcomes, their prescriptive concept of knowledge, and their lack of distinction between the process of deliberation, and the act of decision determination.

Background: There has been a steady trend to involve patients in decision making tasks in clinical practice, part of a shift away from paternalism towards the concept of informed choice. An increased understanding of the uncertainties that exist in medicine, arising from a weak evidence base and, in addition, the stochastic nature of outcomes at the individual level, have contributed to shifting the responsibility for decision making from physicians to patients. This led to increasing use of decision support and communication methods, with the ultimate aim of improving decision making by patients. Interest has therefore developed in attempting to define good decision making and in the development of measurement approaches.

Method: We pose and reflect whether decisions can be judged good or not, and, if so, how this goodness might be evaluated.

Results: We hypothesize that decisions cannot be measured by reference to their outcomes and offer an alternative means of assessment, which emphasizes the deliberation process rather than the decision's end results. We propose decision making comprises a pre-decisional process and an act of decision determination and consider how this model of decision making serves to develop a new approach to evaluating what constitutes a good decision making process. We proceed to offer an alternative, which parses decisions into the pre-decisional deliberation process, the act of determination and post-decisional outcomes.

Discussion: Evaluating the deliberation process, we propose, should comprise of a subjective sufficiency of knowledge, as well as emotional processing and affective forecasting of the alternatives. This should form the basis for a good act of determination.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Sackett D, Scott Richardson W, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Evidence Based Medicine. How to Practice and Teach EBM. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 1997.
    1. Elwyn G, Edwards A, Kinnersley P, Grol R. Shared decision making and the concept of equipoise: defining the competences of involving patients in healthcare choices. BJGP, 2000; 50: 892–899. - PMC - PubMed
    1. O’Connor AM. Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Medical Decision Making, 1995; 15: 25–30. - PubMed
    1. Holmes‐Rovner M, Kroll J, Schmitt N et al. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Medical Decision Making, 1996; 16: 58–64. - PubMed
    1. Brehaut JC, O’Connor AM, Wood TJ et al. Validation of a decision regret scale. Medical Decision Making, 2003; 23: 281–292. - PubMed