FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 357:1340-1344 September 27, 2007 Number 13 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear PubMed Citation

When making many types of decisions, people are confronted with default options — the events or conditions that will be set in place if no alternatives are actively chosen. Because default options are implemented even if decision makers do not actively choose them, they hold a privileged status among all possible choices.

Default options strongly influence behaviors in settings that are not related to health care. For instance, employees more frequently contribute to retirement funds in an automatic-enrollment system than they do in systems that require active participation.¹ Drivers' preferences for a high tort-insurance option increase when it is offered . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Default Options to Improve Health Care

The Gentle Influence of Default Options

The Goals and Ethics of Default Options

Using Default Options Wisely

Deciding Whether Default Options May Be Useful

Ensuring the Opportunity to Choose

Recognizing Established Default Options and Considering Their Likely Effects

Accepting Responsibility for Bad Policies

Conclusions

Source Information

From the Department of Medicine, the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, the Center for Bioethics, and the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics — all at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (S.D.H., D.A.A.); the Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia (D.A.A.); and the Department of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, and the Center for Behavioral and Decision Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan — both in Ann Arbor (P.A.U.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Halpern at the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, 711 Blockley Hall, 423 Guardian Dr., Philadelphia, PA 19104-6021, or at scott.halpern@uphs.upenn.edu.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Piazza, G., Goldhaber, S. Z. (2009). Computerized Decision Support for the Cardiovascular Clinician: Applications for Venous Thromboembolism Prevention and Beyond. Circulation 120: 1133-1137 [Full Text]  
• Halpern, S. D., Madison, K. M., Volpp, K. G. (2009). Patients as Mercenaries?: The Ethics of Using Financial Incentives in the War on Unhealthy Behaviors. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2: 514-516 [Full Text]  
• Siegal, G., Siegal, N., Bonnie, R. J. (2009). An Account of Collective Actions in Public Health. AJPH 99: 1583-1587 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Monroe, J. A., Collins, J. L., Maier, P. S., Merrill, T., Benjamin, G. C., Moulton, A. D. (2009). Legal Preparedness for Obesity Prevention and Control: A Framework for Action. J Law Med Ethics 37: 15-23  
• Singh, H., Mani, S., Espadas, D., Petersen, N., Franklin, V., Petersen, L. A. (2009). Prescription Errors and Outcomes Related to Inconsistent Information Transmitted Through Computerized Order Entry: A Prospective Study. Arch Intern Med 169: 982-989 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Zheng, K., Padman, R., Johnson, M. P., Diamond, H. S. (2009). An Interface-driven Analysis of User Interactions with an Electronic Health Records System. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 16: 228-237 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kim, G. R., Lehmann, C. U., and the Council on Clinical Information Technology, (2008). Pediatric Aspects of Inpatient Health Information Technology Systems. Pediatrics 122: e1287-e1296 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Volpp, K. G., Landrigan, C. P. (2008). Building Physician Work Hour Regulations From First Principles and Best Evidence. JAMA 300: 1197-1199 [Full Text]