Literature DB >> 23895076

Public preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests: a review of conjoint analysis studies.

Alex Ghanouni1, Samuel G Smith, Steve Halligan, Andrew Plumb, Darren Boone, Guiqing Lily Yao, Shihua Zhu, Richard Lilford, Jane Wardle, Christian von Wagner.   

Abstract

A wide range of screening technologies is available for colorectal cancer screening. There is demand to discover public preferences for these tests on the rationale that tailoring screening to preferences may improve uptake. This review describes a type of study (conjoint analysis) used to assess people's preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests and critically evaluates research quality using a recently published set of guidelines. Most primary studies assessed preferences for colonoscopy and fecal occult blood testing but newer technologies (e.g., capsule endoscopy) have not yet been evaluated. Although studies often adhered to guidelines, there was limited correspondence between stated preferences and actual screening behavior. Future research should investigate how studies can go beyond the guidelines in order to improve this and also explore how test preferences may differ by important population subgroups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23895076     DOI: 10.1586/17434440.2013.811867

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices        ISSN: 1743-4440            Impact factor:   3.166


  15 in total

Review 1.  Assessing stated preferences for colorectal cancer screening: a critical systematic review of discrete choice experiments.

Authors:  S Wortley; G Wong; A Kieu; K Howard
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 2.  An innovative robotic platform for magnetically-driven painless colonoscopy.

Authors:  Federico Bianchi; Gastone Ciuti; Anastasios Koulaouzidis; Alberto Arezzo; Danail Stoyanov; Sebastian Schostek; Calogero Maria Oddo; Arianna Menciassi; Paolo Dario
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2017-11

3.  Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Bernt-Peter Robra
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  2021

4.  Colorectal Cancer Screening: Preferences, Past Behavior, and Future Intentions.

Authors:  Carol Mansfield; Donatus U Ekwueme; Florence K L Tangka; Derek S Brown; Judith Lee Smith; Gery P Guy; Chunyu Li; Brett Hauber
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.883

5.  Impact of patient adherence on the cost-effectiveness of noninvasive tests for the initial diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection in the United States.

Authors:  Susan H Boklage; Allen W Mangel; Varun Ramamohan; Deirdre Mladsi; Tao Wang
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 2.711

Review 6.  Stated Preference for Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review of the Literature, 1990-2013.

Authors:  Carol Mansfield; Florence K L Tangka; Donatus U Ekwueme; Judith Lee Smith; Gery P Guy; Chunyu Li; A Brett Hauber
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 7.  Eliciting vulnerable patients' preferences regarding colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review.

Authors:  Samuel J Lee; Meghan C O'Leary; Karl E Umble; Stephanie B Wheeler
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 2.711

8.  Evaluating preferences for colorectal cancer screening in individuals under age 50 using the Analytic Hierarchy Process.

Authors:  Travis Hyams; Bruce Golden; John Sammarco; Shahnaz Sultan; Evelyn King-Marshall; Min Qi Wang; Barbara Curbow
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2021-07-29       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Public preferences for using quantitative faecal immunochemical test versus colonoscopy as diagnostic test for colorectal cancer: evidence from an online survey.

Authors:  Christian von Wagner; Wouter Verstraete; Yasemin Hirst; Brian D Nicholson; Sandro T Stoffel; Helga Laszlo
Journal:  BJGP Open       Date:  2020-05-01

10.  Quantifying public preferences for different bowel preparation options prior to screening CT colonography: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Alex Ghanouni; Steve Halligan; Stuart A Taylor; Darren Boone; Andrew Plumb; Sandro Stoffel; Stephen Morris; Guiqing Lily Yao; Shihua Zhu; Richard Lilford; Jane Wardle; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.