Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

, Volume 39, Issue 1, pp 1–16 | Cite as

A theory of medical decision making under uncertainty

  • Edi Karni


This paper presents an axiomatic model of medical decision making and discusses its potential applications. The medical decision problems envisioned concern the choice of a medical treatment following a diagnosis in situations in which data allow construction of an empirical distribution over the potential outcomes associated with the alternative treatments. In its descriptive interpretation, the model is an hypothesis about the patient’s choice behavior. The theory also aims to aid physicians in recommending treatments in a coherent manner.


Medical decision making Medical treatment choice 

JEL Classifications

I19 D81 


  1. Abdellaoui, M., Barrios, C., & Wakker, P. P. (2007) Reconciling introspective utility with revealed preference: Experimental arguments based on prospect theory. Journal of Econometrics, 138, 356–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, F. M., & Withey, S. B. (1976) Social indicators of well-being. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  3. Arrow, K. J. (1965) Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing. Helsinki: Yrjö Hahnsson Foundation.Google Scholar
  4. Becker, G. M., DeGroot, M. H., & Marschak, J. (1964) Measuring utility by a single response sequential method. Behavioral Science, 9, 226–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Finetti, B. (1952) Sulla preferibilita. Giornale degli Economisti e Annali di Economia, 11, 685–709.Google Scholar
  6. Deutsch, M. (1960) The pathetic fallacy: An observer error in social perception. Journal of Personality, 28, 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Holt, C. A., & Laury, S. K. (2002) Risk aversion and incentive effects. American Economic Review, 92, 1644–1655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Karni, E. (2006) Subjective expected utility theory without states of the world. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 42, 325–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Karni, E., & Safra, Z. (2000) An extension of a theorem of von Neumann and Morgenstern with application to social choice theory. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 34, 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Merton, R. C. (1971) Optimum consumption and portfolio rules in continuous-time model. Journal of Economic Theroy, 3, 373–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pratt, J. W. (1964) Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica, 32, 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Saha, A. (1993) Expo-power utility: A flexible form for absolute and relative risk aversion. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75, 905–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Sloan, F. A., Viscusi, W. K., Chesson, H. W., Conover, C. J., & Whetten-Goldstein, K. (1998) Alternative approaches to valuing intangible health losses: The evidence from multiple sclerosis. Journal of Health Economics, 17, 475–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sommers, B. D., Beard, C. J., Dahl, D., D’Amico, A. V., Kaplan, I. P., Richie J., et al. (2007) Decision analysis using individual patient preferences to determine optimal treatment for localized prostate cancer. Cancer, 110, 2210–2217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sommers, B. D., & Zeckhauser R. J. (2008) Probabilities and preferences: What economics can teach doctors and patients making difficult treatment decisions. Urologic Oncology, 26, 669–673.Google Scholar
  16. Viscusi, W. K., & Evans W. N. (1990) Utility functions that depend on health status: Estimates and economic implications. American Economic Review, 80, 353–374.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations