IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v94y2020ics0305048318308569.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving medical decision-making with a management science game theory approach to liver transplantation

Author

Listed:
  • Mendonça, Francisco V.
  • Catalão-Lopes, Margarida
  • Marinho, Rui Tato
  • Figueira, José Rui

Abstract

Even though nowadays medicine is necessarily linked with technology, it is still a service involving human interaction, which frequently requires the help of management science tools. Indeed, a medical consultation can be an extremely complex example of human interaction. Management science, operations research and in particular game theory may play a key role in helping to improve the results of medical decision-making processes. Game theory is widely used in a large variety of decision-making studies, but there is little application to health care issues, namely the doctor-patient relationship. This paper uses game theory to model the liver transplantation consultation for patients suffering from Alcoholic Liver Disease. This disease is very delicate, and patients at its end-stages require special dedication where management science tools are of utmost importance. They may try to deceive doctors, which may lead to bad outcomes. The Nash equilibrium behaviors by doctor and patient are obtained. Results show some health policy and managerial implications on the decision-makers’ parameters and on the order of play so as to achieve, for instance, higher rates of patient’s cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Mendonça, Francisco V. & Catalão-Lopes, Margarida & Marinho, Rui Tato & Figueira, José Rui, 2020. "Improving medical decision-making with a management science game theory approach to liver transplantation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:94:y:2020:i:c:s0305048318308569
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2019.03.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048318308569
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.omega.2019.03.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bhaumik, P. K., 2002. "Regulating the domestic air travel in India: an umpire's game," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 33-44, February.
    2. Weixin Shang & Liming Liu, 2011. "Promised Delivery Time and Capacity Games in Time-Based Competition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(3), pages 599-610, March.
    3. David K. Levine & Drew Fudenberg, 2006. "A Dual-Self Model of Impulse Control," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1449-1476, December.
    4. Zhou, Wenhui & Wan, Qiang & Zhang, Ren-Qian, 2017. "Choosing among hospitals in the subsidized health insurance system of China: A sequential game approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 257(2), pages 568-585.
    5. Caruso, Valeria & Daniele, Patrizia, 2018. "A network model for minimizing the total organ transplant costs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(2), pages 652-662.
    6. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    7. Soo-Haeng Cho & Christopher S. Tang, 2014. "Technical Note---Capacity Allocation Under Retail Competition: Uniform and Competitive Allocations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 72-80, February.
    8. Dutang, Christophe & Albrecher, Hansjoerg & Loisel, Stéphane, 2013. "Competition among non-life insurers under solvency constraints: A game-theoretic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(3), pages 702-711.
    9. Ding, Yi & Gao, Xing & Huang, Chao & Shu, Jia & Yang, Donghui, 2018. "Service competition in an online duopoly market," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 58-72.
    10. Schelling, Thomas C, 1978. "Egonomics, or the Art of Self-Management," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 290-294, May.
    11. Daniel M. Bartels & Oleg Urminsky, 2011. "On Intertemporal Selfishness: How the Perceived Instability of Identity Underlies Impatient Consumption," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 38(1), pages 182-198.
    12. Rauner, Marion S. & Kraus, Markus & Schwarz, Sigrun, 2008. "Competition under different reimbursement systems: The concept of an internet-based hospital management game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 185(3), pages 948-963, March.
    13. Berman, Oded & Gavious, Arieh, 2007. "Location of terror response facilities: A game between state and terrorist," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(2), pages 1113-1133, March.
    14. Lee, Chungseung & Park, Kun Soo, 2016. "Inventory and transshipment decisions in the rationing game under capacity uncertainty," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 82-97.
    15. Stigler, George J & Becker, Gary S, 1977. "De Gustibus Non Est Disputandum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 76-90, March.
    16. Charles J. Corbett & Uday S. Karmarkar, 2001. "Competition and Structure in Serial Supply Chains with Deterministic Demand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(7), pages 966-978, July.
    17. Soo-Haeng Cho, 2014. "Horizontal Mergers in Multitier Decentralized Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(2), pages 356-379, February.
    18. Colin F. Camerer, 1997. "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 167-188, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dan Friesner, 2024. "Is the Prisoner’s Dilemma an Adequate Concept for Ethical Analysis in Healthcare? An Original Institutional Economic Rejoinder," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 193(2), pages 383-391, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gerhardt, Holger & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Willrodt, Jana, 2017. "Does self-control depletion affect risk attitudes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 463-487.
    2. Sophie Massin, 2011. "La notion d'addiction en économie : La théorie du choix rationnel à l'épreuve," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 121(5), pages 713-750.
    3. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    4. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    5. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    6. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    7. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2014. "Dual criteria decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 101-113.
      • Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet, 2009. "Dual Criteria Decisions," Working Papers 02-2009, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
    8. Stein T. Holden & Mesfin Tilahun, 2024. "Can Climate Shocks Make Vulnerable Subjects More Willing to Take Risks?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(4), pages 967-1007, April.
    9. Claus Dierksmeier, 2020. "From Jensen to Jensen: Mechanistic Management Education or Humanistic Management Learning?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 73-87, September.
    10. Nick Netzer, 2009. "Evolution of Time Preferences and Attitudes toward Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 937-955, June.
    11. Susan Laury & Melayne McInnes & J. Todd Swarthout, 2012. "Avoiding the curves: Direct elicitation of time preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 181-217, June.
    12. Gerardo Infante & Guilhem Lecouteux & Robert Sugden, 2016. "Preference purification and the inner rational agent: a critique of the conventional wisdom of behavioural welfare economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 1-25, March.
    13. Petr Houdek, 2008. "Time Preferences in the Perspective of Cognitive Neurosciences [Časové preference z pohledu kognitivní neurovědy]," E-LOGOS, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2008(1), pages 1-9.
    14. Yixuan Xiao, 2020. "Horizontal Mergers under Yield Uncertainty," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(1), pages 24-34, January.
    15. Garret Ridinger & Richard S. John & Michael McBride & Nicholas Scurich, 2016. "Attacker Deterrence and Perceived Risk in a Stackelberg Security Game," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1666-1681, August.
    16. Lucks, Konstantin, 2016. "The Impact of Self-Control on Investment Decisions," MPRA Paper 73099, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Soo-Haeng Cho & Xin Wang, 2017. "Newsvendor Mergers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 298-316, February.
    18. Ryota Nakamura & Marc Suhrcke & Daniel John Zizzo, 2017. "A triple test for behavioral economics models and public health policy," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(4), pages 513-533, December.
    19. Gómez-Miñambres, Joaquín & Schniter, Eric, 2017. "Emotional calibration of self-control," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 110-118.
    20. Jörg Oechssler & Andreas Roider & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2015. "Cooling Off in Negotiations: Does it Work?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 171(4), pages 565-588, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:94:y:2020:i:c:s0305048318308569. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.