ライフサイエンスコーパス: regret

1 (this accounts for around 50% of their total regret).

2 ment decision were inversely associated with regret.

3 analyses to identify factors associated with regret.

4 interest in PSA were associated with greater regret.

5 th the treatment decision, but 23% expressed regret.

6 minority parents are at heightened risk for regret.

7 .95; P = .04) were less likely to experience regret.

8 identify factors associated with heightened regret.

9 met our definition of heightened decisional regret.

10 ssion, (valve-specific) quality of life, and regret.

11 s that may be addressed to mitigate decision regret.

12 been preferable, which may bring a sense of regret.

13 the one associated with the least amount of regret.

14 ces did not emerge in decisional conflict or regret.

15 ive treatment, might help mitigate long-term regret.

16 e to the orbitofrontal cortex do not express regret.

17 ter skipping a low-cost choice should induce regret.

18 of consent, approximately one tenth mention regret.

19 Overall, 14.6% expressed treatment decision regret: 8.2% of those whose disease was managed conserva

20 essment of depression, anxiety, and decision regret (a sense of disappointment or dissatisfaction in

21 on was associated with increased feelings of regret about choosing prolonged mechanical ventilation.

22 e decisions is necessary to prevent parental regret about decision-making, which can lead to psycholo

23 r the relatives might prevent the relatives' regret about refusal and unnecessary loss of organs.

24 Yet, most donors have no regrets about donation.

25 Our results also suggest that anticipated regrets about the consequences of making the wrong decis

26 t living-related renal donors do not express regret after donation and do report enhanced self-esteem

27 including work on such complex phenomena as regret, ambiguity, and willingness to pay.

28 that are associated with treatment decision regret among long-term survivors of localized prostate c

29 is framework, we provide a novel analysis of regret (an important metric of learning efficacy) for br

30 patient engagement and reduce postoperative regret and conflict about postoperative treatments.

31 tivity at rest are modulated by postdecision regret and gratification in 18 healthy human subjects us

32 ese donors persist, alongside concerns about regret and long-term psychosocial outcomes.

33 They modulate emotions such as regret and relief, and they support moral judgments such

34 o the counterfactual comparisons that typify regret and relief.

35 tests were used to test associations between regret and treatment history, complications, and quality

36 t-centered decisions with reduced decisional regret and work-related stress experienced by physicians

37 d, including questions regarding motivation, regret, and anonymity.

38 control, treatment decision making, decision regret, and cancer-related outlook.

39 eopardizing donor health, anticipating donor regret, and causing donor inconvenience), ambivalence an

40 ontal cortex is active during expressions of regret, and humans with damage to the orbitofrontal cort

41 Although decision regret appears to lessen or dissipate with time, study o

42 Our main outcome measure was heightened regret as measured by the Decisional Regret Scale.

43 hysician's preferences expressed in terms of regret associated with a certain action.

44 k comprehension, and decisional conflict and regret at 24 to 36 weeks' gestation.

45 A regret-based approach is applied to assess the relative

46 Regret-based decision curve analysis (Regret-DCA) was pe

47 Regret-based decision curve analysis provides a novel pe

48 rcinoma and generated a decision model using regret-based decision curve analysis, which integrates b

49 essured their partner to test together; none regretted couples' testing.

50 d then how he can use the minimax or minimax-regret criterion to choose an undominated vaccination ra

51 Regret-DCA showed that for physicians with Pt values of

52 Regret-based decision curve analysis (Regret-DCA) was performed on a Cox's regression model de

53 episodic change on slow timescales, minimax regret decision making, active experimentation to accele

54 ratively, valve-specific quality of life and regret did not differ between the groups.

55 hich may reflect greater prediction error or regret emotion after real monetary losses.

56 In contrast, regret entails recognition that an alternative (counterf

57 odel was associated with the least amount of regret for a wide range of threshold probabilities.

58 t antisocial behavior and a striking lack of regret for the consequences of that behavior.

59 happened (55 of 60 surveys [92%]), expressed regret for what happened (52 of 60 [87%]), expressed con

60 Approximately half of the family members regretted having chosen prolonged mechanical ventilation

61 a patient with euthanasia or PAS, 9 (23.7%) regretted having performed euthanasia or PAS, and 15 (39

62 Our study raises questions about decision regret in patients who agree to have a prognostic test t

63 most likely to express potential anticipated regret in response to intermediate RFR results.

64 Thus, our data link a regret-induced status quo bias to error-related activity

65 thy to report negative affect in response to regret-inducing counterfactual outcomes.

66 linical data and measured treatment decision regret, informed decision making, general- and disease-s

67 Behavioral evidence suggests the emotion of regret is higher when errors arise from rejection rather

68 f action/inaction asymmetries in anticipated regret, may be important in understanding the role of op

69 Such asymmetry in the genesis of regret might drive the status quo bias on subsequent dec

70 Equivalently, it has maximum regret no larger than epsilon We consider trials that dr

71 Trade-offs and scenario regrets observed in the analysis suggest that the combin

72 icularly rain gardens, resulting in half the regret of most options) over end-of-pipe gray alternativ

73 may be costly (on average, 25% of the total regret of these options) and tend to focus on sewer floo

74 e outcomes and impose unnecessary decisional regret on clinicians and patients alike.

75 Factors associated with regret on multivariable analysis included reporting mode

76 Because no-regrets options are spatially heterogeneous, internation

77 ons of demand can be quickly served with "no-regrets" options-or zones that are low-cost, low-environ

78 parametrically to evoke different levels of regret or gratification.

79 Depression, anxiety, and decision regret prior to prognostication (baseline) and at 3 and

80 Regret produced distinct changes in connectivity of subg

81 baseline HADS depression, baseline decision regret, prognostication test result, and adjuvant therap

82 The concept of regret proves useful in identifying performance trade-of

83 of algorithmic variants and bounds on their regret rates.

84 95% CI, 1.58 to 13.8) at increased risk for regret relative to whites ( P = .001 across all categori

85 gratification and orbitofrontal cortex after regret, respectively.

86 ety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Decision Regret Scale were self-administered by the patients prio

87 ghtened regret as measured by the Decisional Regret Scale.

88 The decision regret score was associated with baseline HADS depressio

89 In turn, diminished behavioral regret sensitivity predicted a higher number of prior in

90 However, despite exhibiting intact affective regret sensitivity, they did not use prospective regret

91 et sensitivity, they did not use prospective regret signals to guide choice behavior.

92 I regret that I cannot mention and thank each of these men

93 ishes; the family is too distressed and will regret the decision; overruling harms other patients; an

94 We deeply regret the effect of this action on the work of other in

95 hat the original work is properly cited." We regret the error.

96 , Berlin, Germany (S.S., F.B.)." The authors regret the error.

97 The authors regret the errors.

98 However, 4% were dissatisfied and regretted the decision to donate.

99 do not experience psychological problems or regret their abortion 2 years postabortion, but some do.

100 Donors did not regret their decision to donate; several felt the experi

101 in case of refusal, approximately one third regret their decision, and in case of consent, approxima

102 Few donors (3 ADs and 1 TD) regretted their donation decision.

103 Regret theory provides a new perspective for treatment-r

104 Regret theory serves as a novel framework linking both r

105 The authors regret this error.

106 earch Hospital, Rozzano, Italy." The authors regret this error.

107 tologists can uniformly act according to the regret threshold model.

108 urgery versus TACE were elicited in terms of regret; threshold probabilities (Pt) were calculated to

109 ervingness, protecting conscience, potential regret), upholding fairness (equal access to transplanta

110 Conclusion Regret was a relatively infrequently reported outcome am

111 Behaviorally, experienced regret was higher after an erroneous status quo rejectio

112 Regret was low (3.7% UKDs vs. 7.5% SKDs; P=0.078).

113 Regret was substantial and associated with treatment cho

114 es during decision making evokes feelings of regret, whereas higher gains elicit gratification.

115 on model, race/ethnicity was associated with regret, with black (odds ratio [OR], 6.55; 95% CI, 2.30

116 an apology) or nondisclosure (expression of regret without acceptance of responsibility or an apolog

117 s and cognitive computing, may end in ironic regret without pondering the humanness of fallible artif