RAND's Portfolio Analysis Tool (PAT): Theory, Methods, and Reference Manual

Davis, Paul K.; Dreyer, Paul

doi:10.7249/tr756

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Decisions that depend upon the validity of a single set of assumptions and criteria are not robust to uncertainties [18] and allow little room for judgment [33]. The key in DS system design is to provide enough information to give decision-makers a comprehensive view that mitigates the “fog of war” but not to overload them with so much information that it creates a “glare of war” – i.e., information overload [22,45,46]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, the work represented in this review is not comprehensive or representative of the universe of DS applications, but rather a sample of recent, available work related to high-level, complex decision-making. For example, a number of studies on and tools for strategic planning address issues related to decision making but are not discussed at length due to the focus of this paper [45,48]. Our study also does not represent the heterogeneity in DS function and purpose, whether clinical or non-clinical, but aims to distill lessons up to a sufficiently high level to be valuable for all types of CDS systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advancing clinical decision support using lessons from outside of healthcare: an interdisciplinary systematic review

Davis

Bell

2012

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGreater use of computerized decision support (DS) systems could address continuing safety and quality problems in healthcare, but the healthcare field has struggled to implement DS technology. This study surveys DS experience across multiple non-healthcare disciplines for new insights that are generalizable to healthcare provider decisions. In particular, it sought design principles and lessons learned from the other disciplines that could inform efforts to accelerate the adoption of clinical decision support (CDS).MethodsOur systematic review drew broadly from non-healthcare databases in the basic sciences, social sciences, humanities, engineering, business, and defense: PsychINFO, BusinessSource Premier, Social Sciences Abstracts, Web of Science, and Defense Technical Information Center. Because our interest was in DS that could apply to clinical decisions, we selected articles that (1) provided a review, overview, discussion of lessons learned, or an evaluation of design or implementation aspects of DS within a non-healthcare discipline and (2) involved an element of human judgment at the individual level, as opposed to decisions that can be fully automated or that are made at the organizational level.ResultsClinical decisions share some similarities with decisions made by military commanders, business managers, and other leaders: they involve assessing new situations and choosing courses of action with major consequences, under time pressure, and with incomplete information. We identified seven high-level DS system design features from the non-healthcare literature that could be applied to CDS: providing broad, system-level perspectives; customizing interfaces to specific users and roles; making the DS reasoning transparent; presenting data effectively; generating multiple scenarios covering disparate outcomes (e.g., effective; effective with side effects; ineffective); allowing for contingent adaptations; and facilitating collaboration. The article provides examples of each feature. The DS literature also emphasizes the importance of organizational culture and training in implementation success. The literature contrasts “rational-analytic” vs. “naturalistic-intuitive” decision-making styles, but the best approach is often a balanced approach that combines both styles. It is also important for DS systems to enable exploration of multiple assumptions, and incorporation of new information in response to changing circumstances.ConclusionsComplex, high-level decision-making has common features across disciplines as seemingly disparate as defense, business, and healthcare. National efforts to advance the health information technology agenda through broader CDS adoption could benefit by applying the DS principles identified in this review.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing clinical decision support using lessons from outside of healthcare: an interdisciplinary systematic review

Davis

Bell

2012

BMC Med Inform Decis Mak

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…† The method has been used for 20 years in RAND portfolio-analysis work where, in allocating resources, it is essential to provide satisfactorily for each of a system's critical components (Davis and Dreyer, 2009). activity poses no threat even if he sees legitimacy to terrorist violence, has capability and opportunity, and is willing to accept the costs of action. An analogue is the familiar belief that murder is almost always accompanied by motive, means, and opportunity.…”

Section: Linear Weighted and Thresholded Linear Weighted Sumsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncertainty-Sensitive Heterogeneous Information Fusion: Assessing Threat with Soft, Uncertain, and Conflicting Evidence

Davis

Perry²,

Hollywood³

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.html.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest.RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1200Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2016 RAND CorporationR® is a registered trademark. Cover Image: Fotolia iii PrefaceThis study was sponsored by the Office of Naval Research (ONR). It was initiated by Ivy Estabrooke and continued under Lee Mastrioanni, thrust manager, and Joong Kim, program officer, in ONR's Expeditionary Maneuver Warfare and Combatting Terrorism Department (Code 30). Comments and questions are welcome and should be addressed to Paul K. Davis at pdavis@rand.org.The report documents a basic research project. It is technical in nature and intended for researchers or managers of technical research potentially interested in information fusion for such domains as counterterrorism, law enforcement, and intelligence. Some of the ideas and methods will be of interest to the larger community of researchers involved with information fusion.This research was sponsored by the Office of Naval Research and conducted within the International Security and Defense Policy Center of the RAND National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the Unified Combatant Commands, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the defense agencies, and the defense Intelligence Community.For more information on the International Security and Defense Policy Center, see http://www.rand.org/nsrd/ndri/centers/isdp.html or contact the director (contact information is provided on web page). Summary ObjectivesMilitary and other government organizations put substantial effort into detecting and thwarting attacks such as those by suicide bombers or involving improvised explosive devices. Such attacks may be against military or government installations in the United States or abroad, civilian infrastructure, or any of many other targets. An element of thwarting such attacks is observing suspicious individuals over time with such diverse means as cameras, scanners, and other devices; travel records; behavioral observations; and intelligenc...

show abstract

“…For a more strategic view of portfolio analysis less reliant on mathematical manipulation, see Davis, Shaver, and Beck, 2008. There are also tools available to support this type of portfolio analysis, for example see Dreyer, 2009, andMoynihan, 2005. 6 For discussion of multiresolution modeling with several examples relevant to national security analysis, see Davis and Bigelow, 1998.…”

Section: Redesign To a Multiresolution Version Of Orammentioning

confidence: 99%

The Foundations of Operational Resilience -- Assessing the Ability to Operate in an Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) Environment: The Analytical Framework, Lexicon, and Characteristics of the Operational Resilience Analysis Model (ORAM)

Hagen¹,

Morgan²,

Heim³

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RAND's Portfolio Analysis Tool (PAT): Theory, Methods, and Reference Manual

Cited by 12 publications

References 2 publications

Advancing clinical decision support using lessons from outside of healthcare: an interdisciplinary systematic review

Advancing clinical decision support using lessons from outside of healthcare: an interdisciplinary systematic review

Uncertainty-Sensitive Heterogeneous Information Fusion: Assessing Threat with Soft, Uncertain, and Conflicting Evidence

The Foundations of Operational Resilience -- Assessing the Ability to Operate in an Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) Environment: The Analytical Framework, Lexicon, and Characteristics of the Operational Resilience Analysis Model (ORAM)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About