Purpose: To compare the effects of three methods of values clarification (VCM): balance sheet; rating and ranking; and a discrete choice experiment (DCE) on decision-making about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among adults in the US and Australia.
Methods: Using online panels managed by a survey research organization in the US and Australia, we recruited adults ages 50-75 at average risk for CRC for an online survey. Those eligible were randomized to one of the three VCM tasks. CRC screening options were described in terms of five key attributes: reduction in risk of CRC incidence and mortality; nature of the screening test; screening frequency; complications from screening; and chance of requiring a colonoscopy (as initial or follow-up testing). Main outcomes included self-reported most important attribute and unlabeled screening test preference by VCM and by country, assessed after the VCM.
Results: A total of 920 participants were enrolled; 51 % were Australian; mean age was 59.0; 87.0 % were white; 34.2 % had a 4-year college degree; 42.8 % had household incomes less than $45,000 USD per year; 44.9 % were up to date with CRC screening. Most important attribute differed across VCM groups: the rating and ranking group was more likely to choose risk reduction as most important attribute (69.8 %) than the balance sheet group (54.7 %) or DCE (49.3 %), p < 0.0001; most important attribute did not vary by country (p = 0.236). The fecal occult blood test (FOBT)-like test was the most frequently preferred test overall (55.9 %). Unlabeled test choice did not differ meaningfully by VCM. Australians were more likely to prefer the FOBT (AU 66.2 % vs. US 45.1 %, OR 2.4, 95 % CI 1.8, 3.1). Few participants favored no screening (US: 9.2 %, AU: 6.2 %).
Conclusions: Screening test attribute importance varied by VCM, but not by country. FOBT was more commonly preferred by Australians than by Americans, but test preferences were heterogeneous in both countries.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3930768 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2701-0 | DOI Listing |
Int J Colorectal Dis
December 2024
Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute (CHRI), Chettinad Academy of Research and Education (CARE), Kelambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, 603103, India.
Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) continues to present significant challenges, particularly in patients with proficient mismatch repair/microsatellite stable (pMMR/MSS) tumors. This narrative review aims to provide recent developments in immunotherapy for CRC treatment, focusing on its efficacy and challenges.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMC Med Res Methodol
December 2024
Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Background: The aim of this study is to develop a method we call "cost mining" to unravel cost variation and identify cost drivers by modelling integrated patient pathways from primary care to the palliative care setting. This approach fills an urgent need to quantify financial strains on healthcare systems, particularly for colorectal cancer, which is the most expensive cancer in Australia, and the second most expensive cancer globally.
Methods: We developed and published a customized algorithm that dynamically estimates and visualizes the mean, minimum, and total costs of care at the patient level, by aggregating activity-based healthcare system costs (e.
Contemp Clin Trials
December 2024
San Francisco VA Medical Center, United States of America; Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, United States of America; Measurement Science Quality Enhancement Research Initiative, San Francisco VA Healthcare System, United States of America. Electronic address:
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention is a Veterans Affairs (VA) priority. Colonoscopy quality, especially adenoma detection rate (ADR), is critical for effective screening. Our research indicates considerable variation in ADR among VA providers.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCurr Oncol
December 2024
Department of Medicine, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada.
The Canadian Screening for Colorectal Cancer Research Network (CanSCCRN) recently set out to develop a national CRC screening research agenda and identify priority research areas. The specific objectives were to (1) identify evidence gaps relevant to CRC screening and the barriers and facilitators to evidence generation and uptake by CRC screening programs, (2) establish high-priority collaborative research ideas to inform best CRC screening practices, and (3) identify one to two research topics for grant development and submission within 12 to 18 months. Three focus groups were conducted with network members and relevant parties ( = 15) to identify evidence gaps, barriers, and facilitators to evidence generation and uptake.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCurr Oncol
December 2024
College of Science and Mathematics, Rowan University, 201 Mullica Hill Road, Glassboro, NJ 08028, USA.
: Regional differences in socioeconomic status (SES) are well known, and we believe that the use of geocoding (zip code) can facilitate the introduction of targeted interventions for underserved populations. This is a single-center, retrospective analysis of data extracted from the cancer registry at the Capital Health Cancer Center in Pennington, N. The Capital Health Cancer Center in central New Jersey primarily serves two counties, catering to a diverse patient population from a wide range of socioeconomic backgrounds.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!