Estimating the patient's price of privacy in liver transplantation

Operations Research

Volumn 56, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 1393-1410

  Sandikçi, Burhaneddin ^a   Maillart, Lisa M ^b   Schaefer, Andrew J ^b   Alagoz, Oguzhan ^c   Roberts, Mark S ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^b University of Pittsburgh   (United States)

^c University of Wisconsin Madison   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Dynamic programming optimal control: applications, markov; Health care: treatment

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL DATUM; DYNAMIC PROGRAMMING/OPTIMAL CONTROL: APPLICATIONS, MARKOV; EXPECTED LIVES; LIVER DISEASE; LIVER TRANSPLANTATIONS; MARKOV DECISION PROCESS; NUMERICAL STUDIES; OPTIMAL POLICIES; OPTIMAL SOLUTIONS; PATIENT HEALTHS; PRIVACY CONCERNS; VALUE FUNCTIONS;

HEALTH; HEALTH CARE; OPTIMAL SYSTEMS; OPTIMIZATION;

LIVER;

EID: 61449206251     PISSN: 0030364X     EISSN: 15265463     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/opre.1080.0648     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Ahn, J.-H., J. C. Hornberger. 1996. Involving patients in the cadaveric kidney transplant allocation process: A decision-theoretic perspective. Management Sci. 42(5) 629-641.
2. Alagoz, O. 2004. Optimal policies for the acceptance of living- and cadaveric-donor livers. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.
3. Alagoz, O., L. M. Maillart, A. J. Schaefer, M. S. Roberts. 2004. The optimal timing of living-donor liver transplantation. Management Sci. 50(10) 1420-1430.
4. Alagoz, O., L. M. Maillait, A. J. Schaefer, M. S. Roberts. 2007a. Determining the acceptance of cadaveric livers using an implicit model of the waiting list. Oper. Res. 55(1) 24-36.
5. Alagoz, O., L. M. Maillait, A. J. Schaefer, M. S. Roberts. 2007b. Choosing among living-donor and cadaveric livers. Management Sci. 53(11) 1702-1715.
6. Alagoz, O., C. L. Bryce, A. J. Schaefer, C. H. Chang, D. C. Angus, M. S. Roberts. 2005. Incorporating biological natural history in simulation models: Empiric estimates of the progression of end-stage liver disease. Medical Decision Making 25(6) 620-632.
7. Altman, E. 2005. Applications of dynamic games in queues. A. S. Nowak, K. Szajowski, eds. Advances in Dynamic Games: Applications to Economics, Finance, Optimization, and Stochastic Control. Birkhäuser, Boston, 309-342.
8. Cuende, N., B. Miranda, J. F. Canon, G. Garrido, R. Matesant. 2005. Donor characteristics associated with liver graft survival. Transplantation 79(10) 1445-1452.
9. David, I., U. Yechiali. 1985. A time-dependent stopping problem with application to live organ transplants. Oper. Res. 33(3) 491-504.
10. David, I., U. Yechiali. 1990. Sequential assignment match processes with arrivals of candidates and offers. Probab. Engrg. Informational Sci. 4(4) 413-430.
11. David, I., U. Yechiali. 1995. One-attribute sequential assignment match processes in discrete time. Oper. Res. 43(5) 879-884.
12. Feng, S., N. P. Goodrich, J. L. Bragg-Gresham, D. M. Dykstra, J. D. Punch, M. A. Debroy, S. M. Greenstein, R. M. Merion. 2006. Characteristics associated with liver graft failure: The concept of a donor risk index. Amer. J. Transplantation 6 783-790.
13. Filar, J., K. Vrieze. 1996. Competitive Markov Decision Processes. Springer, New York.
14. Hassin, R., M. Haviv. 2003. To Queue or Not to Queue: Equilibrium Behavior in Queueing Systems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston.
15. HHS. 2005. Annual report of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant Data 1995-2004. Tables 1.1, 1.2, 1.7 retrieved December 1, 2006, http://www.ustransplant.org/annual-reports/.
16. Hornberger, J. C., J.-H. Ahn. 1997. Deciding eligibility for transplantation when a donor kidney becomes available. Medical Decision Making 17(2) 160-170.
17. Howard, D. H. 2001. Dynamic analysis of liver allocation policies. Medical Decision Making 21 257-266.
18. Howard, D. H. 2002. Why do transplant surgeons turn down organs? A model of the accept/reject decision. J. Health Econom. 21 957-969.
19. Iyengar, G. N. 2005. Robust dynamic programming. Math. Oper. Res. 30(2) 257-280.
20. Karlin, S. 1968. Total Positivity, Vol. I. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
21. NCHS. 2006. Deaths: Final data for 2004. Retrieved December 1, 2006, http://www.cdc.gov/nchs.
22. Neyman, A., S. Sorin. 2003. Stochastic Games and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
23. Nilim, A., L. E. Ghaoui. 2005. Robust control of Markov decision processes with uncertain transition matrices. Oper. Res. 53(5) 780-798.
24. Puterman, M. L. 1994. Markov Decision Processes: Discrete Stochastic Dynamic Programming. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
25. Righter, R. 1989. A resource allocation problem in a random environment. Oper. Res. 37(2) 329-338.
26. Roberts, M. S., D. C. Angus, C. L. Bryce, Z. Valenta, L. Weissfeld. 2004. Survival after liver transplantation in the United States: A disease-specific analysis of the UNOS database. Liver Transplantation 10(7) 886-897.
27. Roth, A. E., T. Sönmez, M. U. Ünver. 2004. Kidney exchange. Quart. J. Econom. 119(2) 457-488.
28. Salizzoni, M., A. Franchello, F. Zamboni, A. Ricchiuti, D. Cocchis, F. Fop, A. Brunati, E. Cerutti. 2003. Marginal grafts: Finding the correct treatment for fatty livers. Transplant Internat. 16 (7) 486-493.
29. Shechter, S. M., C. L. Bryce, O. Alagoz, J. E. Kreke, J. E. Stahl, A. J. Schaefer, D. C. Angus, M. S. Roberts. 2005. A clinically based discrete-event simulation of end-stage liver disease and the organ allocation process. Medical Decision Making 25(2) 199-209.
30. Su, X., S. A. Zenios. 2004. Patient choice in kidney allocation: The role of the queueing discipline. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 6(4) 280-301.
31. Su, X., S. A. Zenios. 2005. Patient choice in kidney allocation: A sequential stochastic assignment model. Oper. Res. 53(3) 443-455.
32. Su, X., S. A. Zenios. 2006. Recipient choice can address the efficiency-equity trade-off in kidney transplantation: A mechanism design model. Management Sci. 52(11) 1647-1660.
33. Swani, S., M. L. Puterman, C. B. Weinberg. 2001. Play it again, Sam? Optimal replacement policies for a motion picture exhibitor. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 3(4) 369-386.
34. UNOS. 2006a. View data reports. Retrieved December 1, 2006, http:// www.unos.org/data/.
35. UNOS. 2006b. Policy 3.6: Allocation of livers. Retrieved December 1, 2006, http://www.unos.org/resources/.
36. Vieille, N. 2002. Stochastic games: Recent results. R. J. Aumann, S. Hart, eds. Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1833-1850.
37. Zenios, S. A. 1999. Modeling the transplant waiting list: A queuing model with reneging. Queuing Systems 31 239-251.
38. Zenios, S. A. 2002. Optimal control of a paired-kidney exchange program. Management Sci. 48(3) 328-342.
39. Zenios, S. A. 2004. Models for kidney allocation. M. L. Brandeau, F. Sainfort, W. P. Pierskalla, eds. Operations Research and Health Care: A. Handbook of Methods and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 537-554.
40. Zenios, S. A., G. M. Chertow, L. M. Wein. 2000. Dynamic allocation of kidneys to candidates on the transplant waiting list. Oper. Res. 48(4) 549-569.
41. Zenios, S. A., L. M. Wein, G. M. Chertow. 1999. Evidence-based organ allocation. Amer. J. Medicine 107(1) 52-61.