Skip to main content
Erschienen in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 3/2014

01.09.2014 | Systematic Review

Assessing Stated Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Critical Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments

verfasst von: S. Wortley, G. Wong, A. Kieu, K. Howard

Erschienen in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Ausgabe 3/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

It is well established that screening is effective in reducing the incidence and mortality associated with colorectal cancer (CRC). National screening programs have been implemented in many countries; however, uptake remains an issue. Understanding patient preferences may assist in shaping screening programs and tailoring information about screening tests.

Objective

Our objective was to undertake a systematic review of discrete choice experiments (DCEs) of CRC screening.

Methods

A systematic review of DCEs of CRC screening was undertaken in an average-risk general population. The methodological qualities of the studies were assessed using a standard checklist outlining best practice for conjoint studies.

Results

Nine studies met the selection criteria. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of the data and methods. However, in eight studies, attributes describing accuracy and/or clinical effectiveness were reported to be statistically significant. We also found that individuals were willing to trade-off other attributes such as an increased risk of complications to gain greater clinical benefits. Screening was also preferred to non-screening by the majority of respondents, regardless of the test used.

Conclusions

Understanding and incorporating individuals’ preferences in decision making is increasingly considered essential in the health field. Data from DCEs can provide valuable insights into the trade-offs individuals are willing to undertake in respect to CRC screening. Such insights can be used by decision makers to identify screening tests that could maximize informed uptake. It is likely that, with better reporting and evolving methodology, the contribution that DCEs can make to such debates will increase.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Australia Institute of Health and Welfare & Australia Government Department of Health and Ageing. National Bowel Cancer Screening Program monitoring report 2008. Cancer Series 44, Cat. No 40. 2008. Canberra, AIHW. Ref Type: Report. Australia Institute of Health and Welfare & Australia Government Department of Health and Ageing. National Bowel Cancer Screening Program monitoring report 2008. Cancer Series 44, Cat. No 40. 2008. Canberra, AIHW. Ref Type: Report.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Mandel JS, Church TR, Ederer F, Bond JH. Colorectal cancer mortality: effectiveness of biennial screening for fecal occult blood. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:434–7.PubMedCrossRef Mandel JS, Church TR, Ederer F, Bond JH. Colorectal cancer mortality: effectiveness of biennial screening for fecal occult blood. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:434–7.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Scholefield JH, Moss S, Sufi F, Mangham CM, Hardcastle JD. Effect of faecal occult blood screening on mortality from colorectal cancer: results from a randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2002;50:840–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Scholefield JH, Moss S, Sufi F, Mangham CM, Hardcastle JD. Effect of faecal occult blood screening on mortality from colorectal cancer: results from a randomised controlled trial. Gut. 2002;50:840–4.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, O’Brien MJ, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS, Waye JD, Schapiro M, Bond JH, Panish JF. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1977–81.PubMedCrossRef Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, O’Brien MJ, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS, Waye JD, Schapiro M, Bond JH, Panish JF. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1977–81.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Young GP, St John DJ, Winawer SJ, Rozen P. Choice of fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer screening: recommendations based on performance characteristics in population studies: a WHO (World Health Organization) and OMED (World Organization for Digestive Endoscopy) report. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2499–507.PubMed Young GP, St John DJ, Winawer SJ, Rozen P. Choice of fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer screening: recommendations based on performance characteristics in population studies: a WHO (World Health Organization) and OMED (World Organization for Digestive Endoscopy) report. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2499–507.PubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Center MM, Jemal A, Smith RA, Ward E. Worldwide variations in colorectal cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:366–78.PubMedCrossRef Center MM, Jemal A, Smith RA, Ward E. Worldwide variations in colorectal cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009;59:366–78.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Hol L, Van Leerdam ME, Van Ballegooijen M, Van Vuuren AJ, Van Dekken H, Reijerink JC, Van der Togt AC, Habbema JDF, Kuipers EJ. Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Gut. 2010;59:62–8.PubMedCrossRef Hol L, Van Leerdam ME, Van Ballegooijen M, Van Vuuren AJ, Van Dekken H, Reijerink JC, Van der Togt AC, Habbema JDF, Kuipers EJ. Screening for colorectal cancer: randomised trial comparing guaiac-based and immunochemical faecal occult blood testing and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Gut. 2010;59:62–8.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R. Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection—systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology. 2011;259:393–405.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Pickhardt PJ, Hassan C, Halligan S, Marmo R. Colorectal cancer: CT colonography and colonoscopy for detection—systematic review and meta-analysis. Radiology. 2011;259:393–405.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, Wooldrage K, Hart AR, Northover J, Parkin DM, Wardle J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1624–33.PubMedCrossRef Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, Wooldrage K, Hart AR, Northover J, Parkin DM, Wardle J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1624–33.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Schoen RE, Pinsky PF, Weissfeld JL, Yokochi LA, Church T, Laiyemo AO, Bresalier R, Andriole GL, Buys SS, Crawford ED. Colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality with screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2345–57.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Schoen RE, Pinsky PF, Weissfeld JL, Yokochi LA, Church T, Laiyemo AO, Bresalier R, Andriole GL, Buys SS, Crawford ED. Colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality with screening flexible sigmoidoscopy. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2345–57.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Agrez MV, Redman S, Sanson-Fisher R, Hennrikus D. Feasibility of sigmoidoscopic screening for colorectal cancer in the Hunter Region. Aust N Z J Surg. 1990;60:87–92.PubMed Agrez MV, Redman S, Sanson-Fisher R, Hennrikus D. Feasibility of sigmoidoscopic screening for colorectal cancer in the Hunter Region. Aust N Z J Surg. 1990;60:87–92.PubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Kewenter J, Brevinge H, Engaras B, Haglind E, Ahrén C (1994) Results of screening, rescreening, and follow-up in a prospective randomized study for detection of colorectal cancer by fecal occult blood testing: results for 68,308 subjects. Scand J Gastroenterol 29:468–473. Kewenter J, Brevinge H, Engaras B, Haglind E, Ahrén C (1994) Results of screening, rescreening, and follow-up in a prospective randomized study for detection of colorectal cancer by fecal occult blood testing: results for 68,308 subjects. Scand J Gastroenterol 29:468–473.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Wolf RL, Basch CE, Brouse CH, Shmukler C, Shea S. Patient preferences and adherence to colorectal cancer screening in an urban population. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:809–11.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Wolf RL, Basch CE, Brouse CH, Shmukler C, Shea S. Patient preferences and adherence to colorectal cancer screening in an urban population. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:809–11.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Salkeld GP, Solomon MJ, Short L, Ward J. Measuring the importance of attributes that influence consumer attitudes to colorectal cancer screening. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73:128–32.PubMedCrossRef Salkeld GP, Solomon MJ, Short L, Ward J. Measuring the importance of attributes that influence consumer attitudes to colorectal cancer screening. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73:128–32.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Smith SK, Trevena L, Simpson JM, Barratt A, Nutbeam D, McCaffery KJ. A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010; 341:c5370. Smith SK, Trevena L, Simpson JM, Barratt A, Nutbeam D, McCaffery KJ. A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010; 341:c5370.
16.
Zurück zum Zitat von Wagner C, Good A, Smith SG, Wardle J. Responses to procedural information about colorectal cancer screening using faecal occult blood testing: the role of consideration of future consequences. Health Expect. 2012;15:176–86.CrossRef von Wagner C, Good A, Smith SG, Wardle J. Responses to procedural information about colorectal cancer screening using faecal occult blood testing: the role of consideration of future consequences. Health Expect. 2012;15:176–86.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ (GBR). 2012;21:145–72.CrossRef de Bekker-Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ (GBR). 2012;21:145–72.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Phillips KA, Van BS, Marshall D, Walsh J, Thabane L. A review of studies examining stated preferences for cancer screening. Prev Chronic Dis. 2006;3:A75.PubMedCentralPubMed Phillips KA, Van BS, Marshall D, Walsh J, Thabane L. A review of studies examining stated preferences for cancer screening. Prev Chronic Dis. 2006;3:A75.PubMedCentralPubMed
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Marshall D, McGregor SE, Currie G. Measuring preferences for colorectal cancer screening: what are the implications for moving forward? Patient. 2010;3:79–89.PubMedCrossRef Marshall D, McGregor SE, Currie G. Measuring preferences for colorectal cancer screening: what are the implications for moving forward? Patient. 2010;3:79–89.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Ghanouni A, Smith SG, Halligan S, Plumb A, Boone D, Yao GL, Zhu S, Lilford R, Wardle J, von Wagner C. Public preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests: a review of conjoint analysis studies. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013;10:489–99.PubMedCrossRef Ghanouni A, Smith SG, Halligan S, Plumb A, Boone D, Yao GL, Zhu S, Lilford R, Wardle J, von Wagner C. Public preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests: a review of conjoint analysis studies. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013;10:489–99.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Salkeld G, Solomon M, Short L, Ryan M, Ward JE. Evidence-based consumer choice: a case study in colorectal cancer screening. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2003;27:449–55.PubMedCrossRef Salkeld G, Solomon M, Short L, Ryan M, Ward JE. Evidence-based consumer choice: a case study in colorectal cancer screening. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2003;27:449–55.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Gyrd-Hansen D, Sogaard J. Analysing public preferences for cancer screening programmes. Health Econ (GBR). 2001;10:617–34.CrossRef Gyrd-Hansen D, Sogaard J. Analysing public preferences for cancer screening programmes. Health Econ (GBR). 2001;10:617–34.CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Frew E, Wolstenholme JL, Whynes DK. Willingness-to-pay for colorectal cancer screening. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:1746–51.PubMedCrossRef Frew E, Wolstenholme JL, Whynes DK. Willingness-to-pay for colorectal cancer screening. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:1746–51.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser LA, Regier DA, Johnson FR, Mauskopf J. Conjoint analysis applications in health—a checklist: a report of the ISPOR good research practices for conjoint analysis task force. Val Health. 2011;14:403–13.CrossRef Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser LA, Regier DA, Johnson FR, Mauskopf J. Conjoint analysis applications in health—a checklist: a report of the ISPOR good research practices for conjoint analysis task force. Val Health. 2011;14:403–13.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–9.PubMedCrossRef Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:264–9.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26:661–77.PubMedCrossRef Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26:661–77.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Pignone MP, Brenner AT, Hawley S, Sheridan SL, Lewis CL, Jonas DE, Howard K. Conjoint analysis versus rating and ranking for values elicitation and clarification in colorectal cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:45–50.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Pignone MP, Brenner AT, Hawley S, Sheridan SL, Lewis CL, Jonas DE, Howard K. Conjoint analysis versus rating and ranking for values elicitation and clarification in colorectal cancer screening. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:45–50.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat de Bekker-Grob EW, Hol L, Donkers B, van Dam L, Habbema JD, van Leerdam ME, Kuipers EJ, Essink-Bot ML, Steyerberg EW. Labeled versus unlabeled discrete choice experiments in health economics: an application to colorectal cancer screening. Val Health. 2010;13:315–23.CrossRef de Bekker-Grob EW, Hol L, Donkers B, van Dam L, Habbema JD, van Leerdam ME, Kuipers EJ, Essink-Bot ML, Steyerberg EW. Labeled versus unlabeled discrete choice experiments in health economics: an application to colorectal cancer screening. Val Health. 2010;13:315–23.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Cheng J, Pullenayegum E, Marshall DA, Marshall JK, Thabane L. An empirical comparison of methods for analyzing correlated data from a discrete choice survey to elicit patient preference for colorectal cancer screening. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:15.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Cheng J, Pullenayegum E, Marshall DA, Marshall JK, Thabane L. An empirical comparison of methods for analyzing correlated data from a discrete choice survey to elicit patient preference for colorectal cancer screening. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:15.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat van Dam L, Hol L, de Bekker-Grob EW, Steyerberg EW, Kuipers EJ, Habbema JD, Essink-Bot ML, van Leerdam ME. What determines individuals’ preferences for colorectal cancer screening programmes? A discrete choice experiment. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:150–9.PubMedCrossRef van Dam L, Hol L, de Bekker-Grob EW, Steyerberg EW, Kuipers EJ, Habbema JD, Essink-Bot ML, van Leerdam ME. What determines individuals’ preferences for colorectal cancer screening programmes? A discrete choice experiment. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:150–9.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Phillips KA, Marshall JK, Thabane L, Kulin NA. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Val Health. 2007;10:415–30.CrossRef Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Phillips KA, Marshall JK, Thabane L, Kulin NA. Measuring patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a choice-format survey. Val Health. 2007;10:415–30.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Howard K, Salkeld G. Does attribute framing in discrete choice experiments influence willingness to pay? Results from a discrete choice experiment in screening for colorectal cancer. Value Health. 2009;12:354–63.PubMedCrossRef Howard K, Salkeld G. Does attribute framing in discrete choice experiments influence willingness to pay? Results from a discrete choice experiment in screening for colorectal cancer. Value Health. 2009;12:354–63.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Whynes DK, Frew E, Wolstenholme JL. A comparison of two methods for eliciting contingent valuations of colorectal cancer screening. J Health Econ. 2003;22:555–74.PubMedCrossRef Whynes DK, Frew E, Wolstenholme JL. A comparison of two methods for eliciting contingent valuations of colorectal cancer screening. J Health Econ. 2003;22:555–74.PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Hawley ST, Volk RJ, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon SW, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46(Suppl 1):S10–16. Hawley ST, Volk RJ, Krishnamurthy P, Jibaja-Weiss M, Vernon SW, Kneuper S. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening among racially/ethnically diverse primary care patients. Med Care. 2008;46(Suppl 1):S10–16.
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Salkeld G, Ryan M, Short L. The veil of experience: do consumers prefer what they know best? Health Econ (GBR). 2000;9:267–70.CrossRef Salkeld G, Ryan M, Short L. The veil of experience: do consumers prefer what they know best? Health Econ (GBR). 2000;9:267–70.CrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Hol L, de Bekker-Grob EW, van Dam L, Donkers B, Kuipers EJ, Habbema JD, Steyerberg EW, van Leerdam ME, Essink-Bot ML. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening strategies: a discrete choice experiment. Br J Cancer. 2010;102:972–80.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Hol L, de Bekker-Grob EW, van Dam L, Donkers B, Kuipers EJ, Habbema JD, Steyerberg EW, van Leerdam ME, Essink-Bot ML. Preferences for colorectal cancer screening strategies: a discrete choice experiment. Br J Cancer. 2010;102:972–80.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Kulin NA, Ozdemir S, Walsh JM, Marshall JK, Van BS, Phillips KA. How do physician assessments of patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests differ from actual preferences? A comparison in Canada and the United States using a stated-choice survey. Health Econ (GBR). 2009;18:1420–39.CrossRef Marshall DA, Johnson FR, Kulin NA, Ozdemir S, Walsh JM, Marshall JK, Van BS, Phillips KA. How do physician assessments of patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests differ from actual preferences? A comparison in Canada and the United States using a stated-choice survey. Health Econ (GBR). 2009;18:1420–39.CrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Nayaradou M, Berchi C, Dejardin O, Launoy G. Eliciting population preferences for mass colorectal cancer screening organization. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30:224–33.CrossRef Nayaradou M, Berchi C, Dejardin O, Launoy G. Eliciting population preferences for mass colorectal cancer screening organization. Med Decis Mak. 2010;30:224–33.CrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Marshall D, Bridges JF, Hauber B, Cameron R, Donnalley L, Fyie K, Johnson FR. Conjoint analysis applications in health—how are studies being designed and reported? Patient. 2010;3:249–56.PubMedCrossRef Marshall D, Bridges JF, Hauber B, Cameron R, Donnalley L, Fyie K, Johnson FR. Conjoint analysis applications in health—how are studies being designed and reported? Patient. 2010;3:249–56.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Fagerlin A, Pignone M, Abhyankar P, Col N, Feldman-Stewart D, Gavaruzzi T, Kryworuchko J, Levin CA, Pieterse AH, Reyna V. Clarifying values: an updated review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13:S8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Fagerlin A, Pignone M, Abhyankar P, Col N, Feldman-Stewart D, Gavaruzzi T, Kryworuchko J, Levin CA, Pieterse AH, Reyna V. Clarifying values: an updated review. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013;13:S8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Coulter A, Kryworuchko J, Mullen P, Ng C, Stilwell D, van der Weijden T. Using a systematic development process. In: Volk R, Llewellyn-Thomas H (eds) Update of the international patient decision aids standard (IPDAS), 2012. Coulter A, Kryworuchko J, Mullen P, Ng C, Stilwell D, van der Weijden T. Using a systematic development process. In: Volk R, Llewellyn-Thomas H (eds) Update of the international patient decision aids standard (IPDAS), 2012.
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, Moher D, Rennie D, de Vet HC, Lijmer JG. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:W1–12.PubMedCrossRef Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, Moher D, Rennie D, de Vet HC, Lijmer JG. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:W1–12.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Zurück zum Zitat Brenner A, Howard K, Lewis C, Sheridan S, Crutchfield T, Hawley S, Reuland D, Kistler C, Pignone M. Comparing 3 values clarification methods for colorectal cancer screening decision-making: a randomized trial in the US and Australia. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(3):507–13. Brenner A, Howard K, Lewis C, Sheridan S, Crutchfield T, Hawley S, Reuland D, Kistler C, Pignone M. Comparing 3 values clarification methods for colorectal cancer screening decision-making: a randomized trial in the US and Australia. J Gen Intern Med. 2014;29(3):507–13.
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Carson RT, Louviere JJ, Anderson DA, Arabie P, Bunch DS, Hensher DA, Johnson RM, Kuhfeld WF, Steinberg D, Swait J. Experimental analysis of choice. Market Lett. 1994;5:351–67.CrossRef Carson RT, Louviere JJ, Anderson DA, Arabie P, Bunch DS, Hensher DA, Johnson RM, Kuhfeld WF, Steinberg D, Swait J. Experimental analysis of choice. Market Lett. 1994;5:351–67.CrossRef
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Ratcliffe J, Longworth L. Investigating the structural reliability of a discrete choice experiment within health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:139–44.PubMed Ratcliffe J, Longworth L. Investigating the structural reliability of a discrete choice experiment within health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:139–44.PubMed
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Flitcroft KL, Irwig LM, Carter SM, Salkeld GP, Gillespie JA. Colorectal cancer screening: why immunochemical fecal occult blood tests may be the best option. BMC Gastroenterol. 2012;12:183.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Flitcroft KL, Irwig LM, Carter SM, Salkeld GP, Gillespie JA. Colorectal cancer screening: why immunochemical fecal occult blood tests may be the best option. BMC Gastroenterol. 2012;12:183.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Gregory TA, Wilson C, Duncan A, Turnbull D, Cole SR, Young G. Demographic, social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention and participation in screening for colorectal cancer. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:38.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Gregory TA, Wilson C, Duncan A, Turnbull D, Cole SR, Young G. Demographic, social cognitive and social ecological predictors of intention and participation in screening for colorectal cancer. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:38.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
49.
Zurück zum Zitat Khalid-de Bakker C, Jonkers D, Smits K, Mesters I, Masclee A, Stockbrügger R. Participation in colorectal cancer screening trials after first-time invitation: a systematic review. Endoscopy. 2011;43:1059–86.PubMedCrossRef Khalid-de Bakker C, Jonkers D, Smits K, Mesters I, Masclee A, Stockbrügger R. Participation in colorectal cancer screening trials after first-time invitation: a systematic review. Endoscopy. 2011;43:1059–86.PubMedCrossRef
50.
Zurück zum Zitat Lin OS, Kozarek RA, Gluck M, Jiranek GC, Koch J, Kowdley KV, Irani S, Nguyen M, Dominitz JA. Preference for colonoscopy versus computerized tomographic colonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:1349–60.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Lin OS, Kozarek RA, Gluck M, Jiranek GC, Koch J, Kowdley KV, Irani S, Nguyen M, Dominitz JA. Preference for colonoscopy versus computerized tomographic colonography: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:1349–60.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
51.
Zurück zum Zitat van Dam L, Kuipers EJ, Steyerberg EW, van Leerdam ME, de Beaufort ID. The price of autonomy: should we offer individuals a choice of colorectal cancer screening strategies? Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:e38–46.PubMedCrossRef van Dam L, Kuipers EJ, Steyerberg EW, van Leerdam ME, de Beaufort ID. The price of autonomy: should we offer individuals a choice of colorectal cancer screening strategies? Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:e38–46.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Zurück zum Zitat Taupin DR, Corbett M. A comparison of colorectal neoplasia screening tests: a multicentre community-based study of the impact of consumer choice. Med J Aust. 2006;184:546–50. Taupin DR, Corbett M. A comparison of colorectal neoplasia screening tests: a multicentre community-based study of the impact of consumer choice. Med J Aust. 2006;184:546–50.
53.
Zurück zum Zitat Courtney RJ, Paul CL, Sanson-Fisher RW, Carey ML, Macrae FA, Yoong SL. Community approaches to increasing colorectal screening uptake: a review of the methodological quality and strength of current evidence. The Cancer Council Australia; 2012, p. 27–35. Courtney RJ, Paul CL, Sanson-Fisher RW, Carey ML, Macrae FA, Yoong SL. Community approaches to increasing colorectal screening uptake: a review of the methodological quality and strength of current evidence. The Cancer Council Australia; 2012, p. 27–35.
Metadaten
Titel
Assessing Stated Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Critical Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments
verfasst von
S. Wortley
G. Wong
A. Kieu
K. Howard
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2014
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Ausgabe 3/2014
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Elektronische ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-014-0054-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2014

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 3/2014 Zur Ausgabe