Author
Listed:
- Laura D. Scherer
(Division of Cardiology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA
VA Denver Center for Innovation (COIN), Denver, CO, USA)
- Victoria A. Shaffer
(Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA)
- Tanner Caverly
(Department of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), Ann Arbor VA, Ann Arbor, MI, USA)
- Jeff DeWitt
(Center for Clinical Management Research (CCMR), Ann Arbor VA, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA)
- Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
(Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA)
Abstract
Purpose . People vary in their general preferences for more v. less health care, and the validated Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Scale (MMS) reliably measures this orientation. Medical maximizers (people scoring highly on the MMS) prefer to receive more health care visits, medications, tests, and treatments, whereas minimizers prefer fewer services. However, it is unclear how maximizing-minimizing preferences relate to willingness to pursue appropriate health care. We hypothesized that minimizers are at increased risk of rejecting evidence-based high-benefit care and that maximizers are at risk of wanting low-benefit care. Design . In total, 785 US adults recruited through an online panel expressed preferences to receive or forgo a health care intervention in 18 hypothetical scenarios. In 8 scenarios, the intervention was high benefit per evidence-based guidelines. In the remaining 10 scenarios, the intervention was low benefit. We assessed associations between participants’ MMS score and their preferences for medical intervention in each scenario using regression analyses that adjusted for hypochondriasis, health risk tolerance, health status, and demographic variables. Results . MMS score was significantly associated with preferences in all 18 scenarios after adjusting for other variables. The MMS uniquely explained 11% of the variance in preferences for high-benefit care and 29% of the variance in preferences for low-benefit care. Differences between strong minimizers (10th percentile) and strong maximizers (90th percentile) across the 18 scenarios ranged from 5.6 to 32.3 points on a 1 to 100 preference scale. Conclusions . The MMS reliably predicts people’s willingness to pursue appropriate care, both when appropriate care means taking high-benefit actions and when appropriate care means avoiding low-benefit actions. Targeting and tailoring messages according to maximizing-minimizing preferences might increase the effectiveness of both efforts to reduce overutilization of low-benefit services and campaigns to support uptake of high-benefit care.
Suggested Citation
Laura D. Scherer & Victoria A. Shaffer & Tanner Caverly & Jeff DeWitt & Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher, 2020.
"Medical Maximizing-Minimizing Predicts Patient Preferences for High- and Low-Benefit Care,"
Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(1), pages 72-80, January.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:medema:v:40:y:2020:i:1:p:72-80
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X19891181
Download full text from publisher
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:sae:medema:v:40:y:2020:i:1:p:72-80. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.