The effect of information on prostate cancer screening decision process: a discrete choice experiment

Charvin, Magali; Launoy, Guy; Berchi, Célia

doi:10.1186/s12913-020-05327-x

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In accordance with previous health care DCEs, patients preferred the highest CRC risk reduction. 23 , 24 A linear trend was observed in CRC risk reduction and part-worth utility scores. The importance of CRC risk reduction was valued differently by participants, as expressed by the attribute important scores of the 3 subgroups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Patients Prioritize a Low-volume Bowel Preparation in Colitis-associated Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Wijnands

Groen

Peters

et al. 2021

Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) undergo surveillance colonoscopies at fixed intervals to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Taking patients’ preferences for determining surveillance strategies into account could improve adherence and patient satisfaction. This study aimed to determine patient preferences for CRC surveillance in IBD. Methods We conducted a web-based, multicenter, discrete choice experiment among adult IBD patients with an indication for surveillance. Individuals were repeatedly asked to choose between 3 hypothetical surveillance scenarios. The choice tasks were based on bowel preparation (0.3-4 L), CRC risk reduction (8% to 1%-6%), and interval (1-10 years). Attribute importance scores, trade-offs, and willingness to participate were calculated using a multinomial logit model. Latent class analysis was used to identify subgroups with similar preferences. Results In total, 310 of 386 sent out questionnaires were completed and included in the study. Bowel preparation was prioritized (attribute importance score 40.5%) over surveillance interval and CRC risk reduction (31.1% and 28.4%, respectively). Maximal CRC risk reduction, low-volume bowel preparation (0.3 L laxative with 2 L clear liquid) with 2-year surveillance was the most preferred combination. Three subgroups were identified: a “surveillance avoidant,” “CRC risk avoidant,” and “surveillance preferring” groups. Membership was correlated with age, educational level, perceived CRC risk, the burden of bowel preparation, and colonoscopies. Conclusions Inflammatory bowel disease patients consider bowel preparation as the most important element in acceptance of CRC surveillance. Heterogeneity in preferences was explained by 3 latent subgroups. These findings may help to develop an individualized endoscopic surveillance strategy in IBD patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Patients Prioritize a Low-volume Bowel Preparation in Colitis-associated Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Wijnands

Groen

Peters

et al. 2021

Inflammatory Bowel Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the third step, a structured prioritisation or ranking exercise was used. Ten studies reported that interviewers or focus group participants were asked to rank the attributes from most important to least important, with respect to their preferences for screening [ 33 , 40 – 42 , 44 , 46 , 47 , 49 – 51 ] to identify the relative importance of various attributes. Following this ranking exercise, with or without subsequent panel discussion, a set of exclusion and inclusion criteria was agreed with reference to a study objective.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only one study used C-efficient, and the rest ten studies did not state this. Seventeen studies used only a main effects design, while five studies used a main effect plus two-way interaction design [ 33 , 36 , 47 , 49 ]. Five studies did not report this aspect of the design plan.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodology to derive preference for health screening programmes using discrete choice experiments: a scoping review

Jadambaa

Kularatna

2022

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background While involving users in healthcare decision-making has become increasingly common and important, there is a lack of knowledge about how to best design community-based health screening programs. Reviews of methods that incorporate discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are scarce, particularly for non-cancer illnesses like cardiovascular disease, diabetes and liver disease. We provide an overview of currently available applications and methods available by using DCEs in health screening programs, for chronic conditions. Methods A scoping review was undertaken, where four electronic databases were searched for key terms to identify eligible DCE studies related to community health screening. We included studies that met a pre-determined criteria, including being published between 2011 and 2021, in English and reported findings on human participants. Data were systematically extracted, tabulated, and summarised in a narrative review. Results A total of 27 studies that used a DCE to elicit preferences for cancer (n = 26) and cardiovascular disease screening (n = 1) programmes were included in the final analysis. All studies were assessed for quality, against a list of 13 criteria, with the median score being 9/13 (range 5–12). Across the 27 studies, the majority (80%) had the same overall scores. Two-thirds of included studies reported a sample size calculation, approximately half (13/27) administered the survey completely online and over 75% used the general public as the participating population. Conclusion Our review has led to highlighting several areas of current practice that can be improved, particularly greater use of sample size calculations, increased use of qualitative methods, better explanation of the chosen experimental design including how choice sets are generated, and methods for analysis.

show abstract

“…They were aware of the recent research, showing that screening for prostate cancer leads to a small reduction in disease-specific mortality over ten years but does not affect overall mortality, and the possible complications from biopsies and subsequent treatment [ 9 , 21 ]. Charvin [ 22 ] found that persons with no PCa symptoms attached greater importance to a decrease in the number of false negatives and a reduction in prostate cancer mortality than to other risks such as the number of false positives and over-diagnosis. Our participants had similar thoughts about their patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

General practitioners’ reflections on using PSA for diagnosis of prostate cancer. A qualitative study

Thorsen

Viste

Lid

et al. 2022

Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To investigate how GPs use the PSA test as a diagnostic tool in daily practice. Design Qualitative study using focus group interviews, the transcripts being analyzed by systemic text condensation. Subjects A total of 17 Norwegian GPs in three CME groups. Main outcome measures Exploring GPs’ attitudes to national guidelines and the practical use of the PSA test. Results Detecting prostate cancer in general practice is a common and important, but difficult diagnostic issue. Our participants experienced uncertainty regarding the test when to use it, how to interpret the results and when to refer to specialist health services. Conclusion The study revealed a general ambivalence to the use of PSA. Many patients present urological problems, and many are afraid of having cancer. PSA is commonly used, but sometimes generates problems rather than solving them. Implications The use of the PSA test should be based on a thorough clinical assessment and in close collaboration with the patient. Key points Many patients in general practice present urological problems, and many are afraid of having cancer. GPs have a general ambivalence to the use of PSA when to use it, how to interpret the results and when to refer to specialist health services. The use of PSA sometimes generates problems rather than solving them.

show abstract

The effect of information on prostate cancer screening decision process: a discrete choice experiment

Cited by 8 publications

References 36 publications

Patients Prioritize a Low-volume Bowel Preparation in Colitis-associated Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Patients Prioritize a Low-volume Bowel Preparation in Colitis-associated Colorectal Cancer Surveillance: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Methodology to derive preference for health screening programmes using discrete choice experiments: a scoping review

General practitioners’ reflections on using PSA for diagnosis of prostate cancer. A qualitative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About