Table 4.
Benefit versus harm ratio based on type 1 response*
| Variable | n | Mean | Min | Median | Max | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
PE |
Baut/Haut |
40 |
4.33 |
.6 |
3.00 |
25.00 |
|
Base case |
B1/H1 |
40 |
6.28 |
0.75 |
3.18 |
49.50 |
|
Low risk |
B1/H1 |
39 |
12.46 |
0.66 |
5.26 |
100.00 |
|
High risk |
B1/H1 |
41 |
1.76 |
0.05 |
0.98 |
18.80 |
|
AML |
Baut/Haut |
41 |
2.29 |
0.43 |
2.00 |
10.00 |
|
Base case |
B1/H1 |
41 |
1.55 |
0.00 |
1.00 |
7.07 |
|
Low risk |
B1/H1 |
39 |
4.39 |
0.00 |
1.94 |
22.50 |
| High risk | B1/H1 | 40 | 0.70 | 0.00 | 0.50 | 3.00 |
Abbreviations: Baut/Haut assessment of benefit/harms ratio based on automatic, quick response, B1/H1-type 1 response driven by regret, PE pulmonary embolism, AML acute myeloid leukemia, low “risk” low threshold, high “risk” high threshold clinical decisions. [*Note that type 2 responses that relied on single values, fixed B2/H2 ratios precluding direct statistical comparisons with Baut/Haut. However, the values of B2/H2 differed considerably from Baut/Haut (from 1 to 10 in PE case, and 2 to 0.33 in AML case) consistent with a notion that the Baut/Haut estimates did not solely drive the decision-making (see Discussion)].