Sharing Decisions Research Articles

Platform Information Sharing Decisions Considering Supplier Delivery Services and Encroachment Strategies

The platform often has private information about uncertain demand and determines whether to share the information with the supplier. And the supplier’s choice of delivery services and encroachment may depend on the platform’s information sharing policy. This paper examines the two-dimensional information sharing strategies in a supply chain where the supplier provides delivery services. Based on the game theory model, we find that when the platform shares unfavorable information, the motivation for the supplier’s encroachment decreases firstly. Encroachment does not reduce the level of delivery service from the supplier. Second, delivery services levels of supplier increase with channel substitution rate. Although platform sharing information lowers profits in a supply chain where the supplier provides delivery services, the platform can share information on behalf of delivery services improvement under certain conditions interestingly. Previous papers that ignore a supplier’s decision on delivery services may have underestimated the scope for platform profitable information sharing. Third, the equilibrium profits of supply chain entities present non-monotonous with respect to encroachment cost. The platform often faces a tradeoff. Sharing information, on the one hand, enables the supplier to gain a better understanding of the impact on demand and encourages enhancements to delivery services, which is advantageous to the platform. However, sharing information allows the supplier to absorb the impact of demand information by making modifications to the wholesale price and delivery services, which benefits the supplier but hurts the platform. This makes the negative effects of double marginalization worse.

#3099 Time dependent evolution of patient perception of care in a large dialysis population

Abstract Background and Aims Patient perspectives about the level of attention provided in chronic hemodialysis (HD) are increasingly considered cornerstones in individualization of true patient-centred and high-value care. The objective of our work was to evaluate the time dependent evolution of the level of patient perception of care (PPC) in a large dialysis provider. Method A multicenter retrospective observational study in HD patients was conducted in 19 countries. Responses to an anonymous PPC survey were collected, in all eligible patients, in 2021, 2022 and 2023 and analyzed using Kruskal-Wallis method. PPC survey is composed of several questions covering 12 areas, considered fundamental in hemodialysis care: “Access”, “Communication”, “Fluid intake and diet”, “Information”, “Needling”, “Privacy and dignity”, “Scheduling and planning of your appointments”, “Sharing decisions about your care”, “Support”, “Tests and investigations”, “The environment” and “Transport”. The level of satisfaction about medical staff interactions and level of care before, during and after dialysis, are individually graded from 0 and 7 obtaining a final average PPC score, with a higher score representing a better perception of the level of care provided. Additionally, a Net Promoter Score (NPS) is calculated with a single-question survey and valued between −100 to +100. Results were presented as means and a p-value below 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results All HD patients from 19 countries, with valid responses in the PPC surveys performed in 3 years were included. The response rate increased throughout the period of evaluation: 89.2% in 2021, 86.8% in 2022 and 93.8% in 2023. Generally, an improvement in mean PPC score was observed: 6.30 in 2021, 6.36 in 2022 and 6.43 in 2023 and NPS score also increased over time: 62% in 2021, 66% in 2022 and 68% in 2023. Along the time, the three areas with higher and lower scores were fairly stable: “Fluid intake”, “Information” and “Privacy and dignity” in the top three, and “Needling”, “Transport” and “Sharing decisions about your care” in the bottom three valued parameters. With the exception of “The environment” and “Transport”, all the scores presented an average equal or higher than 6. Conclusion PPC scores in our dialysis population showed a good level of perception of the level of care provided and improved throughout the 3 years of the study evaluation. Despite this, the survey consistently identified three main areas of improvement and motivated the creation and implementation of oriented programs in our population. Re-evaluation of the effect of these interventions in the next survey will be fundamental to guide further actions.

Optimal Information Acquisition and Sharing Decisions

The acquisition and sharing of reviews have significant ramifications for the selection of crowdsourcing designs before mass production. This article studies the optimal decision of a brand enterprise regarding the acquisition/sharing of crowdsourcing design reviews in a supply chain. The authors consider an analytical model where the brand enterprise can privately acquire the manufacturer's review (MR) of crowdsourcing product designs and choose one of two information-sharing schemes—optional or mandatory sharing—to disclose MR to the key opinion leaders (KOLs), which help them to produce fans' reviews (FR). MR and FR integrate into the joint reviews (JR) that impact prospective consumers' purchase intention. The authors find that mandatory sharing significantly harms the brand enterprise's motivation to obtain MR, yet optional sharing is conducive to boosting JR on crowdsourcing designs. In addition, JR has a ceiling value, implying that excessively high FR and MR could not always enhance the effect of JR on crowdsourcing designs.

Competing and Sharing: An Analysis of Optimal Pricing and Capacity Sharing Decisions in a Competitive Market

This research investigates the possibility for firms competing in the same market to willingly and profitably share their capacity. We consider two firms selling substitutable products in four different scenarios, according to their competition (non-competing or competing) and capacity sharing (with or without capacity sharing option) situations. In each scenario, each firm’s optimal capacity sharing and retail pricing strategies are characterized. Our results indicate that the two firms are willing to share their capacity only when the capacity selling firm has sufficiently large capacity while the capacity buying firm has sufficiently small capacity. The firms’ relative capacity in turn determine the optimal capacity sharing price, the exchanged capacity sharing quantity, and their retail prices in the market. Going against the common intuition, our results show that it can still be optimal for a firm to sell her capacity to her direct competitor even when she sets a capacity price lower than her retail price (i.e. she makes less per unit of capacity when selling it to the competitor rather than selling it in her own market). Furthermore, capacity sharing can cause the selling firm to willingly lower her retail price despite the smaller capacity she has left after selling some capacity to the competitor. Overall, our research suggests that capacity sharing is a viable and profitable mechanism to help firms selling substitutable products gain more profits and more effectively match their supplies with demand in the market.

Distributed Energy Sharing Decisions in Industrial Clusters Considering Disappointment Aversion under Carbon Tax Policy: a Differential Game Analysis

Distributed Energy Sharing Decisions in Industrial Clusters Considering Disappointment Aversion under Carbon Tax Policy: a Differential Game Analysis

Drivers of News Sharing: How Context, Content, and User Features Shape Sharing Decisions on Facebook

What makes people share political news on Facebook? Prior studies have identified how different features predict audiences’ likelihood to share news on social media – the so-called shareworthiness of news. However, we still know very little about the relative contributions of these different features for predicting why people decide to share news. We extend the literature by using an experimental design that can compare the relative importance of several key features that contribute to shaping citizens’ sharing decisions: a conjoint experimental design. We use an identical layout to Facebook and a probability sample of Norwegian citizens. We find that particularly content characteristics are important, and that popularity cues and message congruence is conditional on some user characteristics such as age.

Shared Decision Making in Health Care Visits for CKD: Patients’ Decisional Role Preferences and Experiences

Research on shared decision making (SDM) in chronic kidney disease (CKD) has focused almost exclusively on the modality of kidney replacement treatment. We explored what other CKD decisions are recognized by patients, what their preferences and experiences are regarding these decisions, and how decisions are made during their interactions with medical care professionals. Cross-sectional study. Patients with CKD receiving (outpatient) care in 1 of 2 Dutch hospitals. Patients' preferred decisional roles fortreatment decisions were measured using theControl Preferences Scale survey administered after a health care visit with medical professionals. Number of decisions for which patients experienced a decisional role that did or did not match their preferred role. Observed levels of SDM and motivational interviewing in audio recordings of health care visits, measured using the 4-step SDM instrument (4SDM) and Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity coding tools. The results were characterized using descriptive statistics, including differences in scores between the patients' experienced and preferred decisional roles. According to the survey (n=122) patients with CKD frequently reported decisions regarding planning (112 of 122), medication changes (82 of 122), or lifestyle changes (59 of 122). Of the 357 reported decisions in total, patients preferred that clinicians mostly (125 of 357) or fully (101 of 357) make the decisions. For 116 decisions, they preferred a shared decisional role. For 151 of 357 decisions, the patients' preferences did not match their experiences. Decisions were experienced as "less shared/patient-directed" (76 of 357) or "more shared/patient-directed" (75 of 357) than preferred. Observed SDM in 118 coded decisions was low (median4; range, 0 - 22). Motivational interviewing techniques were rarely used. Potential recall and selection bias, and limited generalizability. We identified multiple discrepancies between preferred, experienced, and observed SDM in health care visits for CKD. Although patients varied in their preferred decisional role, a considerable number of patients expressed a preference for shared decision making for many decisions. However, SDM behavior during the health care visits was observed infrequently. Shared decision making (SDM) may be a valuable approach for common chronic kidney disease (CKD) decisions, but our knowledge is limited. We collected patient surveys after health care visits for CKD. Patients most frequently experienced decisions regarding planning, medication, and lifestyle. Three decisional roles were preferred by comparable numbers of patients: let the clinician alone decide, let the clinician decide for the most part, or "equally share" the decision. Patients' experiences of who made the decision did not always match their preferences. In audio recordings of the health care visits, we observed low levels of SDM behavior. These findings suggest that the preference for "sharing decisions" is often unmet for a large number of patients.

Understanding Motivational Factors in Social Media News Sharing Decisions

News sharing has become prevalent on many social media platforms. Users are not only exposed to news shared by others, but also actively share information with a diverse set of motivations. In this work, we propose five news sharing motivations based on the intrinsic and extrinsic factors found in prior literature. Through an online experiment, we further examine how a host of factors, including motivations, influence participants' decision to share news online. We then prompt participants to switch their original decision for extra compensation, observing how different news types, motivational and demographic factors may affect the switch. Our analysis suggests that sharing decisions can be reversed when a strong external stimulus (higher bonus) is presented. Further, there are motivational factors that independently influence participants' reversal decisions. Finally, using our work as an empirical basis, we propose designs for future new sharing systems.

Flexibility Demand Analysis and Regulation Capacity Sharing Decisions Between Interconnected Power Systems Considering Differences in Regulation Performance

Flexibility Demand Analysis and Regulation Capacity Sharing Decisions Between Interconnected Power Systems Considering Differences in Regulation Performance

T022: Sharing decisions regarding radiotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma: a qualitative study of the experiences of patients and clinicians in the UK

Figure 1: The radiotherapy decision-making process in current clinical practice, as described by patients and clinicians Background: Radiotherapy (RT) increases the chance of cure of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) [1] but also has risks, including cardiac disease and second cancers [2]. Whilst guidelines broadly indicate which patients may benefit from RT, there are individual factors that can substantially affect the balance of benefit and risk. Little is known about how these factors are incorporated into decision-making, or patients’ preferences for involvement in decisions. This study aimed to explore the RT decision-making process, and better understand how patients’ preferences are taken into account. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 people treated for HL, and 12 clinicians who specialised in the treatment of HL. We used maximal variation sampling, and Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis. The study was co-designed with four people previously treated for HL and approved by the North of Scotland Ethics Committee. Results: The decision about RT was commonly made by clinicians and presented to patients as a conclusion. Although patients acknowledged they could disagree with the clinicians’ recommendation, they often perceived themselves to be in a life-threatening situation with no real choice about treatment. Patients were highly engaged and keen to receive information, but the majority felt too overwhelmed by the complexity of their illness to participate in RT decisions. Patients and clinicians agreed that the ultimate responsibility for RT decisions lay with healthcare professionals, and that it was too challenging to lay the burden of this decision solely on the person with HL. Clinicians considered individual patient factors when recommending RT, and recognised the importance of ensuring that decisions were in line with a person’s values and preferences (Figure 1). Both patients and clinicians felt shared decision-making was hampered by the lack of easily accessible information predicting the risks of RT for an individual. Conclusion: Decisions about RT lay mostly with clinicians, but individual patient circumstances were considered. The availability of data to understand the risks of RT for an individual would enhance the decision-making process. Literature 1. Shaikh et al. Consolidation radiotherapy following positron emission tomography complete response in early-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: a meta-analysis. Leuk Lymphoma 2020;0:1 2. Gustavsson et al. A systematic overview of radiation therapy effects in Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Acta Oncol 2003;42:589

Service Sharing Decisions between Channels considering Bidirectional Free Riding Based on a Dual-Equilibrium Linkage Algorithm.

To solve the interchannel service-sharing decision problem, this paper constructs a dual-equilibrium linkage model between the static Stackelberg game and dynamic evolutionary game, considers the influence of bidirectional free riding and the proportion of service sharing the cost, and also studies the short-term equilibrium strategy and long-term stability strategy of the band owners and franchisees. The study indicates that, under the static Stackelberg model, as the cost of service sharing gradually decreases, the equilibrium strategy changes from the lose-lose situation of prisoner's dilemma to the Pareto Optimum of service sharing cooperation between the two parties. Under the dynamic evolutionary game, the offline free riding coefficient decreases, the cost-sharing ratio of the service sharing band increases, and the online free riding coefficient is still within the interval, and the stability result will change from the complete service competition to service sharing cooperation between channels.

Information Sharing Decisions in All-Pay Auctions With Correlated Types

Information Sharing Decisions in All-Pay Auctions With Correlated Types

Technology Sharing Decisions Digital Technologies and Sharing Economy

As the conversation regarding sharing as well as economic alliance has heightened around the phrase “sharing economy”, the concept of digital sharing economy emanates more and more significantly. The objective of the paper is to support sharing of digital technologies and forums in order to achieve a sustainable shared economy. In addition, the research uses qualitative research methodology that relies extensively on literature review from assembled academic, peer – reviewed journal articles to improve comprehensive understanding on the impact of digital technologies on sharing economy. The research findings indicate that utilization of digital technologies enhances sharing economy and that the rising of digital sharing forums implies more individuals will be linked to resources closer to them as well as connected to each other. In conclusion, digital technologies in sharing economy offers significance collective solutions to areas such as employment and income generation; natural resources stewardship; asset sharing; knowledge exchange, education and professional establishment; crowd funding; new community – driven technological revolutions; disaster relief; and civic engagement. Keywords: Sharing Economy, Digital Technologies, Digital Platforms, Collective consumption, Collective Economy DOI: 10.7176/ISDE/12-1-04 Publication date: January 31 st 2021

Government Subsidies and Revenue Sharing Decisions for Port and Shipping Service Supply Chain in Emission Control Areas

As the core of the port and shipping service supply chain system, the port and shipping companies must urgently solve the problem of how to balance emissions, costs, and benefits with the gradual extension of China’s emission control area (ECA) and the stringent emission requirements. From the perspective of system optimization, this research constructs a revenue sharing model of the port and shipping service supply chain and deals with the revenue sharing decision-making problem of the secondary service supply chain after port enterprises and shipping enterprises joining the government subsidy mechanism driven by ECA’s policy. Research shows that the government subsidy mechanism directly affects the profit of the port and shipping service supply chain, which is the key factor in implementing the ECA’s policy and promoting the emission reduction of the port and shipping enterprises. The revenue sharing of the port and shipping enterprises plays a decisive role in the revenue of the shipping enterprises. Cooperative emission reduction mechanism should be led by port enterprises to promote the balance between revenue and emission reduction in the supply chain system. Results provide a reference for the Chinese government to formulate corresponding incentives and subsidy policy under the new ECA’s regulations as well as solving the problems of how to balance emissions reduction and cost improvement for port and shipping enterprises.

Ready for shared decision making: Pretesting a training module for health professionals on sharing decisions with their patients.

While shared decision-making (SDM) training programmes for health professionals have been developed in several countries, few have been evaluated. In Norway, a comprehensive curriculum, "klar for samvalg" (ready for SDM), for interprofessional health-care teams was created using generic didactic methods and guidance to tailor training to various contexts. The programmes adapted didactic methods from an evidence-based German training programmes (doktormitSDM). The overall aim was to evaluate two particular SDM modules on facilitating SDM implementation into clinical practice. A descriptive mixed methods study using questionnaires and a focus group guided by the Medical Research Council Complex Interventions Framework. The training was provided as two different applications (module AB [introduction and SDM-basics] and module ABC [introduction, SDM-basics and interactive training]) with differing learning objectives, extent of interactivity, and duration (1 vs 2 hours). Groups of participants were recruited consecutively based on requests for health professional SDM training in university/college- and hospital-settings. By a focus group and a self-administered questionnaire comprehensibility, relevance and acceptance were assessed and qualitative feedback collected after the training. Data passed descriptive and content analysis, respectively. Knowledge was assessed twice using five multiple-choice items and analysed using paired t-tests. In 11 (six AB and five ABC) training sessions, 357/429 (296 AB and 133 ABC) eligible nurses, physicians and health professional students with varying clinical backgrounds and previous levels of SDM-knowledge participated. SDM-knowledge increased from 25-78% (range pretest) to 85-95% (range post-test) (P ≤ .001). The training was rated easy to understand, acceptable and relevant for practice. Findings to improve the education suggest higher emphasis on interprofessional teaching methods. The two SDM training modules met the basic requirements for use in a broader SDM implementation strategy and can even improve knowledge.

"What would you recommend doctor?"-Discourse analysis of a moment of dissonance when sharing decisions in clinical consultations.

BackgroundProven benefits of Shared Decision Making (SDM) include improved patient knowledge, involvement and confidence in making decisions. Although widely advocated in policy, SDM is still not widely implemented in practice. A common patient‐reported barrier is feeling that “doctor knows best”; thus, patients often defer decisions to the clinician.ObjectiveTo examine the nature of the discourse when patients ask clinicians for a treatment recommendation during consultations when treatment decisions are being shared and to examine clinicians’ strategies used in response.Design, Setting and ParticipantsTheme‐orientated discourse analysis was performed on eight audio‐recordings of breast cancer diagnostic consultations in which patients or their partners attempted to defer treatment decisions to the clinician. Clinicians were trained in SDM.ResultsTension was evident in a number of consultations when treatment recommendations were requested. Clinicians responded to recommendation requests by explaining why the decision was being shared (personal nature of the decision, individual preferences and equivalent survival outcomes of treatment options). There was only one instance where a clinician gave a treatment recommendation.Discussion and ConclusionsStrategies for clinicians to facilitate SDM when patients seem to defer decisional responsibility include being clear about why the decision is being shared, acknowledging that this is difficult and making patients feel supported. When patients seek guidance, clinicians can provide a recommendation if grounded in an understanding of the patient's values.

BET 2: Sharing decisions for patients with suspected cardiac chest pain in the emergency department

A short-cut review was carried out to establish whether shared decision making used alongside a decision aid can lead to greater patient satisfaction, lower healthcare resource use and non-inferior clinical...

Parent Experience of Care and Decision Making for Children Who Snore

Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is prevalent and has an impact on the physical and behavioral health of children. Adenotonsillectomy (AT), the primary treatment, is subject to unexplained variation in utilization, which may be reduced by improving physician-patient communication and decision quality for this elective procedure. To identify factors are associated with parental experience and decision making in pediatric SDB and AT surgery. In this qualitative study, parents of children with prior SDB evaluation participated in semistructured, audiorecorded interviews. Open-ended questions regarded experiences of having a child with SDB, communication with pediatric clinicians and surgeons, and experiences with AT surgery. Recordings were transcribed and analyzed for emergent themes using grounded theory methodology. Eleven parents of children ages 2 to 17 years who had previously been diagnosed or treated for SDB were identified via purposive sampling and interviewed between January and April 2015. Interviews were conducted at locations convenient for the participants and separate from the pediatric clinic. A goal of this study was to ascertain how parents perceived sharing decisions with their physicians. Themes of parental experiences and treatment decision-making processes with pediatric SDB. Overarching themes were inclusive of (1) clinical factors of SDB and AT and (2) clinician interpersonal behaviors and communication. Parents described an urgency that led them to seek evaluation or treatment, including fear that the child would stop breathing, or behavioral and/or cognitive delays. Parents often viewed surgery as a "last resort" and had explored alternate therapies prior to seeing the surgeon. Nearly all parents feared anesthesia more than AT surgery itself. Parents described satisfaction when physicians provided them with options, engaged their child in conversation, depicted SDB visually, and were responsive or accessible to questions. Parents regarded a trusting relationship with their pediatrician, confidence in the surgeon, and inclusion in decision making as important. While clinical factors were influential for decision making, interpersonal factors helped parents feel comfortable and influenced their overall experience. Shared decision making, in which parents receive evidence-based information allowing them to accurately perceive risks, benefits, and alternatives about SDB treatment in the setting of trusting clinician-family relationships, may reduce parental decision conflict and improve decision quality toward AT surgery.

Child-parent shared decision making about asthma management.

Aim To explore and describe child-parent shared decision making for the management of childhood asthma. Methods A qualitative, descriptive, interview-based study was undertaken. Eight children and nine parents participated. The framework approach underpinned data analysis. Findings A dynamic model of the way children and parents transfer, shift and share asthma management decisions was uncovered. Asthma management decisions between children and parents were non-linear, with responsibility transferring from parent to child under different conditions. Children made a range of decisions about their asthma, often sharing decisions with their parents. However, during acute illness episodes, children often relied on parents to make decisions about their asthma. Conclusion Neither the child nor parent has complete autonomy over asthma management decisions. Decision making is a dynamic, shifting and shared process, dependent on contextual factors and child and parent decision preferences.

Perspectives of Medical Specialists on Sharing Decisions in Cancer Care: A Qualitative Study Concerning Chemotherapy Decisions With Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma.

In cancer care, difficult decisions concerning advanced treatment need to be made, weighing possible life prolongation against harmful side effects. Treatment is frequently started, showing the need to explore how decisions are made. Little is known about the perspectives of physicians on sharing decision making with patients. This qualitative study aimed to describe the perspectives of medical specialists on the decision-making process with patients with glioblastoma concerning starting new treatment. Qualitative interviews were held with medical specialists. One focus group was organized with medical professionals. Their opinions about elements of shared decision making and the applicability in the context of patients with glioblastoma were assessed. The topic list for the focus group was based on the analysis of the interviews. Qualitative analysis of the transcripts was performed by three researchers independently. Medical specialists considered shared decision making to be important; however, they did not adhere to its elements. Stopping treatment was not considered equal to continuing treatment. Exploration of the patients' wishes was done implicitly, and shared responsibility for the decision was not highly recognized. The main barriers to shared decision making were preferences of both patients and specialists for starting or continuing treatment and assumptions of physicians about knowing what patients want. Medical specialists recognized the importance of patient involvement but experienced difficulty in sharing decision making in practice. Elements of shared decision making are partly followed but do not guide decision making. To improve cancer care, education of medical specialists and adjustment to the elements are needed to involve patients.