Suggestions(1)
Exact(2)
The Value of Information (VoI) is classically defined as the amount a decision maker would be willing to pay for information prior to making a decision (Convertino et al. 2014c; Keisler 2004).
The CEAC shows the probability that adding fulvestrant to the treatment sequence is cost effective for a given threshold willingness to pay (WTP) ceiling ratio, that is, the assumed maximum amount a decision maker would be willing to pay for an additional unit of effect (QALY or LYG).
Similar(58)
Sometimes it seems like a single decision maker would be far more efficient.
For example, the robot selection problem involving three different robots (Rao 2007) using three popular MADM methods provided the following solutions: GTMA: Robot 2 − Robot 1 − Robot 3. AHP: Robot 3 − Robot 1 − Robot 2. Modified TOPSIS: Robot 1 − Robot 3 − Robot 2. Naturally, the decision maker would be in a confusion in choosing the right decision.
It can be interpreted as the maximum amount the decision maker would be willing to spend to obtain perfect information [ 15].
Decision makers would be aided by a framework which structures complex information and accounts for implications of the intricacy.
A perceived weakness under the individual category was that decision makers would be unwilling to release resources from their own program budgets to fund investments elsewhere.
"It might well turn out," Kahn suggests, "that U.S. decision makers would be willing, among other things, to accept the high risk of an additional one percent of our children being born deformed if that meant not giving up Europe to Soviet Russia".
The decision makers would be more comfortable and confident to give vague judgments rather than evaluating pairwise comparisons using single numeric values.
Even the recognition of the issue and a more empathic and clearer understanding from the decision-makers would be welcome.
If it were possible to develop a set of market archetypes, then policy and decision-makers would be able to situate their own health market among these archetypes and accordingly better understand the implications of research findings from elsewhere for their particular setting.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com