IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v9y1989i1p51-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Medical Decision Making Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process

Author

Listed:
  • James G. Dolan

Abstract

The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was used to determine which of seven recommended antibiotic regimens represented optimal initial therapy for a young woman hospitalized for treat ment of acute pyelonephritis. The model included the following criteria: maximize cure, minimize adverse effects (broken down into very serious, serious, and limited), minimize antibiotic resis tance, and minimize cost (divided into total cost and patient cost). The criteria were weighted according to judgments made by 61 practicing clinicians. Alternatives were compared relative to the criteria using published information on the expected frequencies of urinary pathogens and drug toxicity, local antibiotic sensitivities and antibiotic charges, and expert opinion regarding their propensities for inducing antimicrobial resistance. The analysis identified ampicillin com bined with gentamicin as the optimal regimen. This study illustrates several features of the AHP that make it promising for use in medical decision making: its ability to incorporate multiple criteria into a formal decision model, its procedural simplicity, and its similarity to current patient management guidelines. Further studies to establish the role of the AHP in medical decision making are warranted.

Suggested Citation

  • James G. Dolan, 1989. "Medical Decision Making Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(1), pages 51-56, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:9:y:1989:i:1:p:51-56
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8900900109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X8900900109
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X8900900109?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. Dolan & Bernard J. Isselhardt & Joseph D. Cappuccio, 1989. "The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Medical Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 9(1), pages 40-50, February.
    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. Singpurwalla, Norah & Forman, Ernest & Zalkind, David, 1999. "Promoting shared health care decision making using the analytic hierarchy process," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 277-299, December.
    2. Pu Ji & Hong-yu Zhang & Jian-qiang Wang, 2017. "Fuzzy decision-making framework for treatment selection based on the combined QUALIFLEX–TODIM method," International Journal of Systems Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(14), pages 3072-3086, October.
    3. Johanna Vásquez & Sergio Botero, 2020. "Hybrid Methodology to Improve Health Status Utility Values Derivation Using EQ-5D-5L and Advanced Multi-Criteria Techniques," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    4. James Dolan, 2010. "Multi-Criteria Clinical Decision Support," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 3(4), pages 229-248, December.
    5. Matthew Liberatore & Robert Nydick & Constantine Daskalakis & Elisabeth Kunkel & James Cocroft & Ronald Myers, 2009. "Helping Men Decide About Scheduling a Prostate Cancer Screening Exam," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 39(3), pages 209-217, June.
    6. Liberatore, Matthew J. & Nydick, Robert L., 2008. "The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 194-207, August.
    7. Hasan, Mostafa & Büyüktahtakın, İ. Esra & Elamin, Elshami, 2019. "A multi-criteria ranking algorithm (MCRA) for determining breast cancer therapy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 83-101.

    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. Johanna Vásquez & Sergio Botero, 2020. "Hybrid Methodology to Improve Health Status Utility Values Derivation Using EQ-5D-5L and Advanced Multi-Criteria Techniques," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-18, February.
    2. James Dolan, 2010. "Multi-Criteria Clinical Decision Support," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 3(4), pages 229-248, December.
    3. Hasan, Mostafa & Büyüktahtakın, İ. Esra & Elamin, Elshami, 2019. "A multi-criteria ranking algorithm (MCRA) for determining breast cancer therapy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 83-101.
    4. Pu Ji & Hong-yu Zhang & Jian-qiang Wang, 2017. "Fuzzy decision-making framework for treatment selection based on the combined QUALIFLEX–TODIM method," International Journal of Systems Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(14), pages 3072-3086, October.
    5. Singpurwalla, Norah & Forman, Ernest & Zalkind, David, 1999. "Promoting shared health care decision making using the analytic hierarchy process," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 277-299, December.
    6. Liberatore, Matthew J. & Nydick, Robert L., 2008. "The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 194-207, August.

    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:9:y:1989:i:1:p:51-56. 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: 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.

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