Using game theory to inform medical decisions
In the medical field, physicians are required to make choices regarding patient treatment, often involving uncertain outcomes. The article “Playing doctor: Application of game theory to medical decision-making” discusses the use of game theory to rationally analyze a given situation and assess the optimal treatment method for a maximized outcome. Using the example of progressive liver failure, for which there are a limited number of treatment strategies, the article explores the ramifications of employing game theory for a given set of conditions. In the absence of a dominant strategy, responsibility falls upon the physician to determine the most rational course of action based on a mixed Nash equilibrium.
However, despite the logic behind game theory, it is also important to address the ethical consequences of its application. When one of the goals of health care is the pursuit of equity, is it ever fair for a physician to employ a mixed strategy, in which probability would favor some patients over others? Could a reliance on rational treatment strategy overpower the empathy that is also crucial to assessment of patient health and treatment? And can the logical treatment course determined by a physician infringe upon the autonomy of the patient? The answers to these moral dilemmas remain unclear. In accordance with the article, I think that game theory cannot stand on its own as a determinant of medical decisions, but maybe can be employed to help rationally inform the balance of factors which determine the course of patient treatment.
Diamond, George A., Alan Rozanski, and Michael Steuer. “Playing Doctor: Application of Game Theory to Medical Decision-making.” Journal of Chronic Diseases 39.9 (1986): 669-77.