Literature DB >> 29740804

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

Carol Mansfield1, Donatus U Ekwueme2, Florence K L Tangka2, Derek S Brown3, Judith Lee Smith2, Gery P Guy2, Chunyu Li4, Brett Hauber5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening rates for colorectal cancer are below the Healthy People 2020 goal. There are several colorectal cancer screening tests that differ in terms of accuracy, recommended frequency, and administration. In this article, we compare how a set of personal characteristics correlates with preferences for colorectal cancer screening test attributes, past colorectal cancer screening behavior, and future colorectal cancer screening intentions.
METHODS: We conducted a discrete-choice experiment survey to assess relative preferences for attributes of colorectal cancer screening tests among adults aged 50-75 years in USA. We used a latent class logit model to identify classes of preferences and calculated willingness to pay for changes in test attributes. A set of personal characteristics were included in the latent class analysis and analyses of self-reported past screening behavior and self-assessed likelihood of future colorectal cancer screening.
RESULTS: Latent class analysis identified three types of respondents. Class 1 valued test accuracy, class 2 valued removing polyps and avoiding discomfort, and class 3 valued cost. Having had a prior colonoscopy and a higher income were predictors of the likelihood of future screening and membership in classes 1 and 2. Health insurance and a self-reported higher risk of developing colorectal cancer were associated with prior screening and higher future screening intentions, but not class membership.
CONCLUSION: We identified distinct classes of preferences focusing on different test features and personal characteristics associated with reported behavior and intentions. Healthcare providers should engage in a careful assessment of patient preferences when recommending colorectal cancer test options to encourage colorectal cancer screening uptake.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29740804      PMCID: PMC6226356          DOI: 10.1007/s40271-018-0308-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient        ISSN: 1178-1653            Impact factor:   3.883


  21 in total

1.  Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health - How are Studies being Designed and Reported?: An Update on Current Practice in the Published Literature between 2005 and 2008.

Authors:  Deborah Marshall; John F P Bridges; Brett Hauber; Ruthanne Cameron; Lauren Donnalley; Ken Fyie; F Reed Johnson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Patient-physician colorectal cancer screening discussions: delivery of the 5A's in practice.

Authors:  Jennifer Elston Lafata; Gregory S Cooper; George Divine; Susan A Flocke; Nancy Oja-Tebbe; Kurt C Stange; Tracy Wunderlich
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 5.043

3.  What determines individuals' preferences for colorectal cancer screening programmes? A discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  L van Dam; L Hol; E W de Bekker-Grob; E W Steyerberg; E J Kuipers; J D F Habbema; M L Essink-Bot; M E van Leerdam
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 9.162

4.  Data and trends in cancer screening in the United States: results from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  Judith Swan; Nancy Breen; Barry I Graubard; Timothy S McNeel; Donald Blackman; Florence K Tangka; Rachel Ballard-Barbash
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-10-15       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Preferences for colorectal cancer screening strategies: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  L Hol; E W de Bekker-Grob; L van Dam; B Donkers; E J Kuipers; J D F Habbema; E W Steyerberg; M E van Leerdam; M L Essink-Bot
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2010-03-02       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  "Fault-line of an earthquake": a qualitative examination of barriers and facilitators to colorectal cancer screening in rural, Eastern North Carolina.

Authors:  Stephanie B Jilcott Pitts; C Suzanne Lea; Carrie L May; Chelsea Stowe; Dana J Hamill; Kelcy T Walker; Timothy L Fitzgerald
Journal:  J Rural Health       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 4.333

7.  Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Ann G Zauber; Iris Lansdorp-Vogelaar; Amy B Knudsen; Janneke Wilschut; Marjolein van Ballegooijen; Karen M Kuntz
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-06       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 8.  Public preferences for colorectal cancer screening tests: a review of conjoint analysis studies.

Authors:  Alex Ghanouni; Samuel G Smith; Steve Halligan; Andrew Plumb; Darren Boone; Guiqing Lily Yao; Shihua Zhu; Richard Lilford; Jane Wardle; Christian von Wagner
Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 3.166

9.  What would make getting colorectal cancer screening easier? Perspectives from screeners and nonscreeners.

Authors:  Gilda G Medina; Amy McQueen; Anthony J Greisinger; L Kay Bartholomew; Sally W Vernon
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 2.260

10.  Cancer screening test use - United States, 2013.

Authors:  Susan A Sabatino; Mary C White; Trevor D Thompson; Carrie N Klabunde
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2015-05-08       Impact factor: 17.586

View more
  9 in total

1.  Do Non-participants at Screening have a Different Threshold for an Acceptable Benefit-Harm Ratio than Participants? Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Tina Birgitte Hansen; Jes Sanddal Lindholt; Axel Diederichsen; Rikke Søgaard
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Attributes Used for Cancer Screening Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Rebekah Hall; Antonieta Medina-Lara; Willie Hamilton; Anne E Spencer
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 3.  Heparan Sulfate Proteoglycans in Human Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Carolina Meloni Vicente; Daiana Aparecida da Silva; Priscila Veronica Sartorio; Tiago Donizetti Silva; Sarhan Sydney Saad; Helena Bonciani Nader; Nora Manoukian Forones; Leny Toma
Journal:  Anal Cell Pathol (Amst)       Date:  2018-06-20       Impact factor: 2.916

4.  Rab23 contributes to the progression of colorectal cancer via protein kinase B and extracellular signal-regulated kinase signaling pathways.

Authors:  Tongbi Zhao; Dong Han; Huan Meng
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 2.967

5.  SPT6 recruits SND1 to co-activate human telomerase reverse transcriptase to promote colon cancer progression.

Authors:  Chaoliang Diao; Ping Guo; Wenjing Yang; Yao Sun; Yina Liao; Yue Yan; Anshi Zhao; Xin Cai; Jiaojiao Hao; Sheng Hu; Wendan Yu; Manyu Chen; Ruozhu Wang; Wenyang Li; Yan Zuo; Jinjin Pan; Chunyu Hua; Xiaona Lu; Wenhua Fan; Zongheng Zheng; Wuguo Deng; Guangyu Luo; Wei Guo
Journal:  Mol Oncol       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 6.603

6.  Colorectal cancer screening preferences among physicians and individuals at average risk: A discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Sebastian Heidenreich; Lila J Finney Rutten; Lesley-Ann Miller-Wilson; Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno; Gin Nie Chua; Deborah A Fisher
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 4.711

Review 7.  Attributes in stated preference elicitation studies on colorectal cancer screening and their relative importance for decision-making among screenees: a systematic review.

Authors:  Melanie Brinkmann; Lara Marleen Fricke; Leonie Diedrich; Bernt-Peter Robra; Christian Krauth; Maren Dreier
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2022-09-22

Review 8.  Methodology to derive preference for health screening programmes using discrete choice experiments: a scoping review.

Authors:  David Brain; Amarzaya Jadambaa; Sanjeewa Kularatna
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-08-24       Impact factor: 2.908

9.  What Factors Influence Non-Participation Most in Colorectal Cancer Screening? A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Bas Donkers; Jorien Veldwijk; Marcel F Jonker; Sylvia Buis; Jan Huisman; Patrick Bindels
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 3.883

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.