Additive Multicriteria Decision Analysis Models: Misleading Aids for Life-Critical Shared Decision Making

Abstract

Background. There is growing interest in multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) for shared decision making (SDM). A distinguishing feature is that a preferred treatment should extend years of life and/or improve health-related quality of life (HRQL). Additive MCDA models are inadequate for the task. A plethora of MCDA models exist, each claiming that it can correctly solve real-world problems. However, most were developed in nonhealth fields and rely on additive models. This makes the problem of choosing an MCDA model as an aid for SDM a challenging and urgent one. Methods. A published 2017 MCDA of a hypothetical prostate cancer patient is used as a case in point of how not to do and how to do MCDA for SDM. We critically review it and analyze it using several additive linear MCDA models with years of life and HRQL as attributes and the linear quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) model. The following simple reasonableness test is presented for applicability of a method as an aid for SDM: Can a treatment that causes premature death trump a treatment that causes acceptable adverse effects? Results. Additive MCDA models and the linear QALY recommend significantly different alternatives. Additive MCDA models fail the proposed reasonableness test; the linear QALY model passes. Conclusions. MCDA possesses a strong craft element in addition to its technical aspects. MCDA practitioners and clinicians need to understand model limitations to choose models appropriate to the context. Additive MCDA models are inadequate for life-critical SDM. We advocate QALY models with additional research for increased realism as a tool for SDM.

Value in oncology from multi-criteria decision analysis: A systematic review

“…(33) One of the reasons for their widespread use in health is the ease of calculating the aggregation function and their transparency-however, one of the significant limitations is the presence of compensation. (34,35) Compensation arises when an alternative performs worse on one criterion and is better on another than another alternative. Thus, the aggregate value of the first alternative is better than the second alternative, even if it performs worse on one criterion.…”

Additive Multicriteria Decision Analysis Models Are Not Misleading Aids for Life-Critical Shared Decision Making

“…The conclusion is that additive MCDA models are not suitable for use in shared decision making. 1 The argument presented in the article does not justify this conclusion. The adequacy of a MCDA model depends on the criteria included, the alternatives considered, and how well it provides useful insights for the involved decision makers.…”

“…The recent article by Kujawski, Triantaphyllou, and Yanase presents a detailed theoretical discussion of multiattribute value theory and a critical analysis of a single multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) model that fails to meet a “reasonableness test” defined as “can a treatment that causes premature death trump a treatment that causes acceptable adverse effects?” The conclusion is that additive MCDA models are not suitable for use in shared decision making. 1…”

A critical analysis of multi-criteria models for the prioritisation of health threats

“…Concern about best practices is emerging within the health evaluation community, as the recent reviews on multi-criteria models for health threat assessments (O'Brien et al, 2016) and healthcare decisions (Marsh et al, 2016) attest. In addition, thoughtful critiques of weak modelling practices have recently been published in health technology assessment (Morton, 2017) and life-critical medical decision making (Kujawski et al, 2019). However, these articles do not provide a critical assessment of health threat prioritisation models.…”