Colorado Cardiovascular Outcomes Research Consortium, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
University of Colorado School of Nursing, Aurora, Colorado.
J Card Fail. 2017 Nov;23(11):794-799. doi: 10.1016/j.cardfail.2017.03.008. Epub 2017 Mar 28.
Studies have demonstrated that patients with primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) often misunderstand the ICD. Advances in behavioral economics demonstrate that some misunderstandings may be due to cognitive biases. We aimed to explore the influence of cognitive bias on ICD decision making.
We used a qualitative framework analysis including 9 cognitive biases: affect heuristic, affective forecasting, anchoring, availability, default effects, halo effects, optimism bias, framing effects, and state dependence. We interviewed 48 patients from 4 settings in Denver. The majority were male (n = 32). Overall median age was 61 years. We found frequent evidence for framing, default, and halo effects; some evidence of optimism bias, affect heuristic, state dependence, anchoring and availability bias; and little or no evidence of affective forecasting. Framing effects were apparent in overestimation of benefits and downplaying or omitting potential harms.
We found evidence of cognitive bias in decision making for ICD implantation. The majority of these biases appeared to encourage ICD treatment.
研究表明,患有原发性预防植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)的患者经常对 ICD 存在误解。行为经济学的进步表明,一些误解可能是由于认知偏差造成的。我们旨在探讨认知偏差对 ICD 决策的影响。
我们使用定性框架分析,包括 9 种认知偏差:情感启发式、情感预测、锚定、可得性、默认效应、晕轮效应、乐观偏差、框架效应和状态依赖。我们在丹佛的 4 个地点采访了 48 名患者。其中大多数是男性(n=32)。总体中位数年龄为 61 岁。我们发现框架、默认和晕轮效应的证据频繁;一些乐观偏差、情感启发式、状态依赖、锚定和可得性偏差的证据;以及几乎没有或没有情感预测的证据。框架效应表现在高估收益和淡化或省略潜在危害。
我们在 ICD 植入决策中发现了认知偏差的证据。这些偏差中的大多数似乎鼓励 ICD 治疗。