Use of Influence Diagrams to Structure Medical Decisions

Influence diagrams are compact representations of decision problems that are mathematically equivalent to decision trees. The authors present five important principles for structuring a decision as an influence diagram: 1) start at the value node and work back to the decision nodes; 2) draw the arcs in the direction that makes the probabilities easiest to assess; 3) use informational arcs to specify which events will have been observed at the time each decision is made; 4) ensure that missing arcs reflect intentional assertions about conditional independence and the timing of observations; and 5) ensure that there are no cycles in the influence diagram. They then build an influence diagram for the problem of staging non-small-cell lung cancer as an illustration. Influence diagrams offer several strengths for structuring medical decisions. They represent graphically and compactly the probabilistic relationships between parameters in the model. Influence diagrams also allow the model to be structured in a fashion that eases the necessary probability assessments, regardless of whether the assessments are based on available evidence or on expert judgment. Influence diagrams provide an important complement to decision trees, especially for representing probabilistic relationships among variables in a decision model. Key words : decision analysis; influence diagrams; decision tree; decision techniques; cost-effectiveness analysis. (Med Decis Making 1997;17:263-275)

[1]  D. Feeny,et al.  Utilities and Quality-Adjusted Life Years , 1989, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[2]  R F Nease,et al.  Interpretation of "life expectancy". , 1988, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[3]  M. Johannesson,et al.  The Validity of QALYs , 1997, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[4]  J R Beck,et al.  Mediastinal Staging in Non-small-cell Lung Cancer , 1989, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[5]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Clinical Decision Analysis , 1980 .

[6]  B. McNeil,et al.  Speech and survival: tradeoffs between quality and quantity of life in laryngeal cancer. , 1981, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Joseph S. Pliskin,et al.  Utility Functions for Life Years and Health Status , 1980, Oper. Res..

[8]  D K Owens,et al.  Development of outcome-based practice guidelines: a method for structuring problems and synthesizing evidence. , 1993, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[9]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  An Assessment of Decision Analysis , 1980, Oper. Res..

[10]  Ronald A. Howard,et al.  Readings on the Principles and Applications of Decision Analysis , 1989 .

[11]  Ross D. Shachter,et al.  Representation and Analysis of Medical Decision Problems with Influence Diagrams , 1997, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[12]  J D Habbema,et al.  Management of children with acute pharyngitis: a decision analysis. , 1992, The Journal of family practice.

[13]  G. Torrance Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. , 1986, Journal of health economics.

[14]  Ross D. Shachter,et al.  A backwards view for assessment , 1986, UAI.

[15]  Samuel Holtzman,et al.  Intelligent decision systems , 1988 .

[16]  G. Loomes,et al.  The use of QALYs in health care decision making. , 1989, Social science & medicine.

[17]  Nease Rf,et al.  Interpretation of "life expectancy". , 1988 .

[18]  Ross D. Shachter Evaluating Influence Diagrams , 1986, Oper. Res..