Literature DB >> 19508416

Valuing the benefit of diagnostic testing for genetic causes of idiopathic developmental disability: willingness to pay from families of affected children.

D A Regier1, J M Friedman, N Makela, M Ryan, C A Marra.   

Abstract

Idiopathic developmental disability (DD) has been found to put significant psychological distress on families of children with DD. The cause of the disability, however, is unknown for up to one-half of the affected children. Chromosomal abnormalities identified by cytogenetic analysis are the most frequently recognized cause of DD, although they account for less than 10% of cases. Array genomic hybridization (AGH) is a new diagnostic tool that provides a much higher detection rate for chromosomal imbalance than conventional cytogenetic analysis. This increase in diagnostic capability comes at greater monetary costs, which provides an impetus for understanding how individuals value genetic testing for DD. This study estimated the willingness to pay (WTP) for diagnostic testing to find a genetic cause of DD from families of children with DD. A discrete choice experiment was used to obtain WTP values. When it was assumed that AGH resulted in twice as many diagnoses and a 1-week reduction in waiting time compared with conventional cytogenetic analysis, this study found that families were willing to pay up to CDN$1118 (95% confidence interval, $498-1788) for the expected benefit. These results support the conclusion that the introduction of AGH into the Canadian health care system may increase the perceived welfare of society, but future studies should examine the cost-benefit of AGH vs cytogenetic testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19508416     DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2009.01193.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genet        ISSN: 0009-9163            Impact factor:   4.438


  20 in total

1.  Points to consider in assessing and appraising predictive genetic tests.

Authors:  Wolf H Rogowski; Scott D Grosse; Jürgen John; Helena Kääriäinen; Alastair Kent; Ulf Kristofferson; Jörg Schmidtke
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2010-10-16

2.  Parents' perceptions of the usefulness of chromosomal microarray analysis for children with autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Marian Reiff; Ellen Giarelli; Barbara A Bernhardt; Ebony Easley; Nancy B Spinner; Pamela L Sankar; Surabhi Mulchandani
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2015-10

Review 3.  A Review of Health Economic Studies Comparing Traditional and Massively Parallel Sequencing Diagnostic Pathways for Suspected Genetic Disorders.

Authors:  Patrick Fahr; James Buchanan; Sarah Wordsworth
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Value for money? Array genomic hybridization for diagnostic testing for genetic causes of intellectual disability.

Authors:  Dean A Regier; Jan M Friedman; Carlo A Marra
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  "Set in Stone" or "Ray of Hope": Parents' Beliefs About Cause and Prognosis After Genomic Testing of Children Diagnosed with ASD.

Authors:  Marian Reiff; Eva Bugos; Ellen Giarelli; Barbara A Bernhardt; Nancy B Spinner; Pamela L Sankar; Surabhi Mulchandani
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2017-05

6.  Valuing Preferences for the Process and Outcomes of Clinical Genetics Services: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Ewan Gray; Martin Eden; Caroline Vass; Marion McAllister; Jordan Louviere; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments.

Authors:  Franziska Severin; Jörg Schmidtke; Axel Mühlbacher; Wolf H Rogowski
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Societal preferences for the return of incidental findings from clinical genomic sequencing: a discrete-choice experiment.

Authors:  Dean A Regier; Stuart J Peacock; Reka Pataky; Kimberly van der Hoek; Gail P Jarvik; Jeffrey Hoch; David Veenstra
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 9.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael D Clark; Domino Determann; Stavros Petrou; Domenico Moro; Esther W de Bekker-Grob
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Personal utility and genomic information: look before you leap.

Authors:  Scott D Grosse; Colleen M McBride; James P Evans; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.