Decision Analysis and Medical Malpractice

Brian E. Forst
Additional contact information
Brian E. Forst: The Center for Naval Analyses, Arlington, Virginia

Operations Research, 1974, vol. 22, issue 1, 1-12

Abstract: Normative decision theory has been applied to the problem of evaluating alternative diagnosis-treatment strategies. The courts rely on a different set of doctrines in performing the same sort of evaluation. This paper investigates the differences. It is suggested that the alleged “malpractice crisis” results largely from the application of a set of ambiguous and mutually inconsistent medico-legal principles such as “reasonable medical certainty,” “standards of good medical practice in the community,” and “proximate cause.” The expected utility criterion of decision analysis is proposed as an alternative to this melange, both for the purposes of establishing the existence of negligence and for determining the proper amount of compensation.

Date: 1974
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/opre.22.1.1 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:oropre:v:22:y:1974:i:1:p:1-12

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Operations Research from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().