Literature DB >> 17555955

What influences clinicians' operative preferences for women with breast cancer? An application of the discrete choice experiment.

Lisa J M Caldon1, Stephen J Walters, Julie Ratcliffe, Malcolm W R Reed.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Little is known regarding cancer clinicians' treatment preferences. AIM: Determine the impact of pre-operative variables over specialist breast clinicians' operative preferences using discrete choice experiment methodology.
METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of operative preferences to hypothetical scenarios based on: patient age, bra cup size, cancer size, site and focality.
RESULTS: 73% response rate (68/93). Multinomial logistic regression across scenarios (n=1695) with allowance for response clustering, comparing equal preference for mastectomy and breast conservation surgery (BCS) with preference for mastectomy or BCS. Increasing patient age, cancer size, central site, multi-focality and reducing cup size, all associated with preference for mastectomy, over equal preference, over BCS (p<0.001). Doctors preferred specific treatments, females and nurses avoided mastectomy (p=0.015 and p<0.001 respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Clinician preferences were predominantly treatment guideline congruent, but significantly influenced by patient age, clinician gender and occupation. This methodology is capable of elucidating treatment preferences and could be applied elsewhere where treatment options and practice variability exist.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17555955     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2007.04.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  7 in total

1.  Understanding surgical decision making in early hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Hari Nathan; John F P Bridges; Richard D Schulick; Andrew M Cameron; Kenzo Hirose; Barish H Edil; Christopher L Wolfgang; Dorry L Segev; Michael A Choti; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Impact of MRI-evaluated neoadjuvant chemotherapy response on change of surgical recommendation in breast cancer.

Authors:  Jeon-Hor Chen; Byron A Feig; David J-B Hsiang; John A Butler; Rita S Mehta; Shadfar Bahri; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Weighting composite endpoints in clinical trials: essential evidence for the heart team.

Authors:  Betty C Tong; Joel C Huber; Deborah D Ascheim; John D Puskas; T Bruce Ferguson; Eugene H Blackstone; Peter K Smith
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2012-07-12       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Oncology Treatments.

Authors:  Hannah Collacott; Vikas Soekhai; Caitlin Thomas; Anne Brooks; Ella Brookes; Rachel Lo; Sarah Mulnick; Sebastian Heidenreich
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Why do hospital mastectomy rates vary? Differences in the decision-making experiences of women with breast cancer.

Authors:  L J M Caldon; K A Collins; D J Wilde; S H Ahmedzai; T W Noble; A Stotter; D M Sibbering; S Holt; M W R Reed
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Utilization of neoadjuvant chemotherapy varies in the treatment of women with invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Adedayo A Onitilo; Jill K Onesti; Richard M Single; Jessica M Engel; Ted A James; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Tom Barney; Laurence E McCahill
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  A six-gene-based signature for breast cancer radiotherapy sensitivity estimation.

Authors:  Xing Chen; Junjie Zheng; Min Ling Zhuo; Ailong Zhang; Zhenhui You
Journal:  Biosci Rep       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.840

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.