Literature DB >> 11134216

Patient preference for cancer therapy: an overview of measurement approaches.

A M Stiggelbout1, J C de Haes.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In the era of evidence-based medicine and shared decision making, the formal assessment of patient preference for treatments or treatment outcomes has attracted much attention. In this article, the two most common approaches to the evaluation of preference, ie, utility assessment and probability trade-off assessment, are described. The purpose is to provide clinicians with the background knowledge needed to interpret preference studies published in the literature and to judge whether the reported findings are relevant to their own patients.
METHODS: An overview is given of the methods used to assess utilities and probability trade-off scores. Evidence on determinants of such scores is presented. Examples from oncology are provided. Because experience with the treatment plays an important role as a determinant of preferences for both treatments and treatment outcomes, special attention is paid to the interpretation of studies in the light of subject selection. Directions for future research are suggested.
CONCLUSION: The choice of approach and the measuring instrument depend on the goal of the preference assessment. Normal psychologic processes, such as coping, adaptation, and cognitive dissonance reduction, cause patients who are about to undergo a therapy or have experienced a therapy to rate it more favorably than other patients do. This should be remembered when using evidence from the literature to inform patients or for patient decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11134216     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.1.220

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  36 in total

1.  The association between symptom burdens and utility in Chinese cancer patients.

Authors:  Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Xin Shelley Wang; Scott B Cantor; Charles S Cleeland
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-06-22       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Why values elicitation techniques enable people to make informed decisions about cancer trial participation.

Authors:  Purva Abhyankar; Hilary L Bekker; Barbara A Summers; Galina Velikova
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Chemotherapy use and patient treatment preferences in advanced colorectal cancer: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  S Yousuf Zafar; Jennifer L Malin; Steven C Grambow; David H Abbott; Jane T Kolimaga; Leah L Zullig; Jane C Weeks; John Z Ayanian; Katherine L Kahn; Patricia A Ganz; Paul J Catalano; Dee W West; Dawn Provenzale
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-09-12       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Maximal endurable time states and the standard gamble: more preference reversals.

Authors:  P F M Stalmeier; A L Verheijen
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2012-12-09

Review 5.  Patient-reported outcomes and survivorship in radiation oncology: overcoming the cons.

Authors:  Farzan Siddiqui; Arthur K Liu; Deborah Watkins-Bruner; Benjamin Movsas
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Preference values associated with stage III colon cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Jennie H Best; Louis P Garrison; William Hollingworth; Scott D Ramsey; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 7.  Measuring outcomes in oncology treatment: the importance of patient-centered outcomes.

Authors:  Aundrea Oliver; Caprice C Greenberg
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.741

8.  Women's preference for laparoscopic or abdominal hysterectomy.

Authors:  Kirsten B Kluivers; Brent C Opmeer; Peggy M Geomini; Marlies Y Bongers; Mark E Vierhout; Gérard L Bremer; Ben W J Mol
Journal:  Gynecol Surg       Date:  2008-12-16

9.  A regret theory approach to decision curve analysis: a novel method for eliciting decision makers' preferences and decision-making.

Authors:  Athanasios Tsalatsanis; Iztok Hozo; Andrew Vickers; Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-09-16       Impact factor: 2.796

Review 10.  Shared decision-making in the primary care treatment of late-life major depression: a needed new intervention?

Authors:  Patrick J Raue; Herbert C Schulberg; Roberto Lewis-Fernandez; Carla Boutin-Foster; Amy S Hoffman; Martha L Bruce
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.485

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.