scholarly journals Preferred Lung Cancer Screening Modalities in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (23) ◽  
pp. 6110
Author(s):  
Zixuan Zhao ◽  
Lingbin Du ◽  
Le Wang ◽  
Youqing Wang ◽  
Yi Yang ◽  
...  

This study aimed to identify preferred lung cancer screening modalities in a Chinese population and predict uptake rates of different modalities. A discrete choice experiment questionnaire was administered to 392 Chinese individuals aged 50–74 years who were at high risk for lung cancer. Each choice set had two lung screening options and an option to opt-out, and respondents were asked to choose the most preferred one. Both mixed logit analysis and stepwise logistic analysis were conducted to explore whether preferences were related to respondent characteristics and identify which kinds of respondents were more likely to opt out of any screening. On mixed logit analysis, attributes that were predictive of choice at 1% level of statistical significance included the screening interval, screening venue, and out-of-pocket costs. The preferred screening modality seemed to be screening by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) + blood test once a year in a general hospital at a cost of RMB 50; this could increase the uptake rate by 0.40 compared to the baseline setting. On stepwise logistic regression, those with no endowment insurance were more likely to opt out; those who were older and housewives/househusbands, and those with a health check habit and with commercial endowment insurance were less likely to opt out from a screening programme. There was considerable variance between real risk and self-perceived risk of lung cancer among respondents. Lung cancer screening uptake can be increased by offering various screening modalities, so as to help policymakers further design the screening modality.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Peters ◽  
E van Grinsven ◽  
M van de Haterd ◽  
D van Lankveld ◽  
J Verbakel ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. e038865
Author(s):  
Jackline Oluoch-Aridi ◽  
Mary B Adam ◽  
Francis Wafula ◽  
Gilbert Kokwaro

ObjectiveTo identify what women want in a delivery health facility and how they rank the attributes that influence the choice of a place of delivery.DesignA discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted to elicit rural women’s preferences for choice of delivery health facility. Data were analysed using a conditional logit model to evaluate the relative importance of the selected attributes. A mixed multinomial model evaluated how interactions with sociodemographic variables influence the choice of the selected attributes.SettingSix health facilities in a rural subcounty.ParticipantsWomen aged 18–49 years who had delivered within 6 weeks.Primary outcomeThe DCE required women to select from hypothetical health facility A or B or opt-out alternative.ResultsA total of 474 participants were sampled, 466 participants completed the survey (response rate 98%). The attribute with the strongest association with health facility preference was having a kind and supportive healthcare worker (β=1.184, p<0.001), second availability of medical equipment and drug supplies (β=1.073, p<0.001) and third quality of clinical services (β=0.826, p<0.001). Distance, availability of referral services and costs were ranked fourth, fifth and sixth, respectively (β=0.457, p<0.001; β=0.266, p<0.001; and β=0.000018, p<0.001). The opt-out alternative ranked last suggesting a disutility for home delivery (β=−0.849, p<0.001).ConclusionThe most highly valued attribute was a process indicator of quality of care followed by technical indicators. Policymakers need to consider women’s preferences to inform strategies that are person centred and lead to improvements in quality of care during delivery.


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 643-653
Author(s):  
Sarah Janse ◽  
Ellen Janssen ◽  
Tanya Huwig ◽  
Upal Basu Roy ◽  
Andrea Ferris ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Charlotte Beaudart ◽  
◽  
Jürgen M. Bauer ◽  
Francesco Landi ◽  
Olivier Bruyère ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and aims To assess experts’ preference for sarcopenia outcomes. Methods A discrete-choice experiment was conducted among 37 experts (medical doctors and researchers) from different countries around the world. In the survey, they were repetitively asked to choose which one of two hypothetical patients suffering from sarcopenia deserves the most a treatment. The two hypothetical patients differed in five pre-selected sarcopenia outcomes: quality of life, mobility, domestic activities, fatigue and falls. A mixed logit panel model was used to estimate the relative importance of each attribute. Results All sarcopenia outcomes were shown to be significant, and thus, important for experts. Overall, the most important sarcopenia outcome was falls (27%) followed by domestic activities and mobility (24%), quality of life (15%) and fatigue (10%). Discussion and conclusion Compared to patient’s preferences, experts considered falls as a more important outcome of sarcopenia, while the outcomes fatigue and difficulties in domestic activities were considered as less important.


2010 ◽  
Vol 102 (6) ◽  
pp. 972-980 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Hol ◽  
E W de Bekker-Grob ◽  
L van Dam ◽  
B Donkers ◽  
E J Kuipers ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 108 (3) ◽  
pp. 533-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
E W de Bekker-Grob ◽  
J M Rose ◽  
B Donkers ◽  
M-L Essink-Bot ◽  
C H Bangma ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
pp. cmw146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Carter-Harris ◽  
Susan Brandzel ◽  
Karen J Wernli ◽  
Joshua A Roth ◽  
Diana S M Buist

2010 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-159 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. van Dam ◽  
L. Hol ◽  
E.W. de Bekker-Grob ◽  
E.W. Steyerberg ◽  
E.J. Kuipers ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Gita Afsharmanesh ◽  
Farimah Rahimi ◽  
Leila Zarei ◽  
Farzad Peiravian ◽  
Gholamhossein Mehralian

Abstract Background The argument about funding criteria poses challenges for health decision-makers in all countries. This study aimed to investigate the public and decision-maker preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions in Iran. Methods A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used for eliciting the preferences of the public and decision-makers. Four attributes including health gain after treatment, the severity of the disease, prevalence of the disease, and monthly out of pocket and relevant levels were designed in the form of hypothetical scenarios. The analysis was done by using conditional logit analysis. Results The results show all of four attributes are important for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions. But a medicine that improves health gain after treatment is more likely to be a choice in subsidy decisions (by relative importance of 28% for public and 42% for decision-makers). Out of pocket, severity, and prevalence of disease subsequently influence the preferences of the public and decision-makers, respectively. The greatest difference is observed in changing the health gain after treatment and out of pocket levels, between public and decision-makers. Conclusion This research reveals that the public is willing and able to provide preferences to inform policymakers for pharmaceutical decision-making; it also sets grounds for further studies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document