2020
DOI: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000260
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Public Preferences and Predicted Uptake for Esophageal Cancer Screening Strategies: A Labeled Discrete Choice Experiment

Abstract: INTRODUCTION: As novel, less invasive (non)endoscopic techniques for detection of Barrett's esophagus (BE) have been developed, there is now renewed interest in screening for BE and related neoplasia. We aimed to determine public preferences for esophageal adenocarcinoma screening to understand the potential of minimally invasive screening modalities. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was conducted in 1,500 individuals, aged 50–75 years, from the general population.… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

3
35
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
3
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A (2020), The Netherlands 34 DCE Population registry sample 50–75 y 375 2 unlabelled hypothetical tests Hypothetical Yes Screening preferences, intended participation No methodological deficiencies Peters et al. B (2020), The Netherlands 33 DCE Population registry sample 50–75 y 554 EGD, TNE, non-endoscopic device, breath/ blood test Hypothetical Yes Screening preferences, intended participation No methodological deficiencies Quantitative Blevins et al. (2018) US 18 RCT Random sample Olmsted County residents >50 y, with GORD symptoms 201 huTNE, muTNE, EGD Experienced Yes Screening preferences, tolerability Fair Chak et al.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A (2020), The Netherlands 34 DCE Population registry sample 50–75 y 375 2 unlabelled hypothetical tests Hypothetical Yes Screening preferences, intended participation No methodological deficiencies Peters et al. B (2020), The Netherlands 33 DCE Population registry sample 50–75 y 554 EGD, TNE, non-endoscopic device, breath/ blood test Hypothetical Yes Screening preferences, intended participation No methodological deficiencies Quantitative Blevins et al. (2018) US 18 RCT Random sample Olmsted County residents >50 y, with GORD symptoms 201 huTNE, muTNE, EGD Experienced Yes Screening preferences, tolerability Fair Chak et al.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The included studies were published between 2004 and 2020 and were performed in the United States (US) ( n = 9), 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 United Kingdom (UK) ( n = 5), 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 the Netherlands ( n = 3), 32 , 33 , 34 Israel ( n = 1), 35 and Japan ( n = 1). 36 Study participants experienced a real-life screening procedure ( n = 14), 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 30 , 32 , 35 , 36 or completed a questionnaire or interview on their intent to participate in OAC screening ( n = 5).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the patient and compliance viewpoint, blood testing is familiar and commonly accepted. Indeed, a recent survey of 554 Dutch population respondents returned a strong preference of non-invasive (blood or breath) tests over endoscopic or capsule-based tests, provided the test is sufficiently sensitive [35]. Furthermore, a single blood draw may be used for multiple blood tests in the pathology laboratory.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the patient and compliance viewpoint, blood testing is familiar and commonly accepted. Indeed, a recent survey of 554 Dutch population respondents returned a strong preference of non-invasive (blood or breath) tests over endoscopic or capsule-based tests, provided the test is sufficiently sensitive [41]. Furthermore, a single blood draw may be used for multiple blood tests in the pathology laboratory.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%