Preferences for Genetic Testing to Predict the Risk of Developing Hereditary Cancer: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Medical Decision Making Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-07 DOI:10.1177/0272989X241227425
N Morrish, T Snowsill, S Dodman, A Medina-Lara
{"title":"Preferences for Genetic Testing to Predict the Risk of Developing Hereditary Cancer: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.","authors":"N Morrish, T Snowsill, S Dodman, A Medina-Lara","doi":"10.1177/0272989X241227425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding service user preferences is key to effective health care decision making and efficient resource allocation. It is of particular importance in the management of high-risk patients in whom predictive genetic testing can alter health outcomes.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This review aims to identify the relative importance and willingness to pay for attributes of genetic testing in hereditary cancer syndromes.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, and EconLit using discrete choice experiment (DCE) terms combined with terms related to hereditary cancer syndromes, malignancy synonyms, and genetic testing.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Following independent screening by 3 reviewers, 7 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, being a DCE investigating patient or public preferences related to predictive genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Extracted data included study and respondent characteristics, DCE attributes and levels, methods of data analysis and interpretation, and key study findings.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>Studies covered colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancer syndromes. Results were summarized in a narrative synthesis and the quality assessed using the Lancsar and Louviere framework.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>This review focuses only on DCE design and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes rather than other complex diseases. Challenges also arose from heterogeneity in attributes and levels.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Test effectiveness and detection rates were consistently important to respondents and thus should be prioritized by policy makers. Accuracy, cost, and wait time, while also important, showed variation between studies, although overall reduction in cost may improve uptake. Patients and the public would be willing to pay for improved detection and clinician over insurance provider involvement. Future studies should seek to contextualize findings by considering the impact of sociodemographic characteristics, health system coverage, and insurance policies on preferences.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Test effectiveness and detection rates are consistently important to respondents in genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.Reducing the cost of genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes may improve uptake.Individuals are most willing to pay for a test that improves detection rates, identifies multiple cancers, and for which results are shared with a doctor rather than with an insurance provider.</p>","PeriodicalId":49839,"journal":{"name":"Medical Decision Making","volume":" ","pages":"252-268"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10988993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X241227425","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Understanding service user preferences is key to effective health care decision making and efficient resource allocation. It is of particular importance in the management of high-risk patients in whom predictive genetic testing can alter health outcomes.

Purpose: This review aims to identify the relative importance and willingness to pay for attributes of genetic testing in hereditary cancer syndromes.

Data sources: Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HMIC, Web of Science, and EconLit using discrete choice experiment (DCE) terms combined with terms related to hereditary cancer syndromes, malignancy synonyms, and genetic testing.

Study selection: Following independent screening by 3 reviewers, 7 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, being a DCE investigating patient or public preferences related to predictive genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.

Data extraction: Extracted data included study and respondent characteristics, DCE attributes and levels, methods of data analysis and interpretation, and key study findings.

Data synthesis: Studies covered colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancer syndromes. Results were summarized in a narrative synthesis and the quality assessed using the Lancsar and Louviere framework.

Limitations: This review focuses only on DCE design and testing for hereditary cancer syndromes rather than other complex diseases. Challenges also arose from heterogeneity in attributes and levels.

Conclusions: Test effectiveness and detection rates were consistently important to respondents and thus should be prioritized by policy makers. Accuracy, cost, and wait time, while also important, showed variation between studies, although overall reduction in cost may improve uptake. Patients and the public would be willing to pay for improved detection and clinician over insurance provider involvement. Future studies should seek to contextualize findings by considering the impact of sociodemographic characteristics, health system coverage, and insurance policies on preferences.

Highlights: Test effectiveness and detection rates are consistently important to respondents in genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes.Reducing the cost of genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes may improve uptake.Individuals are most willing to pay for a test that improves detection rates, identifies multiple cancers, and for which results are shared with a doctor rather than with an insurance provider.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预测患遗传性癌症风险的基因检测偏好:离散选择实验的系统回顾》。
背景:了解服务使用者的偏好是有效医疗决策和高效资源分配的关键。目的:本综述旨在确定遗传性癌症综合征基因检测属性的相对重要性和支付意愿:在 Medline、Embase、PsycINFO、HMIC、Web of Science 和 EconLit 中使用离散选择实验(DCE)术语结合与遗传性癌症综合征、恶性肿瘤同义词和基因检测相关的术语进行检索:经过 3 位审稿人的独立筛选,有 7 项研究符合纳入标准,它们都是调查与遗传性癌症综合征预测性基因检测相关的患者或公众偏好的离散选择实验(DCE):提取的数据包括研究和受访者特征、DCE属性和水平、数据分析和解释方法以及主要研究结果:研究涵盖结直肠癌、乳腺癌和卵巢癌综合征。数据综述:研究涵盖结直肠癌、乳腺癌和卵巢癌综合征,研究结果以叙述性综述的形式进行总结,并采用 Lancsar 和 Louviere 框架对研究质量进行评估:本综述仅关注遗传性癌症综合征的 DCE 设计和测试,而非其他复杂疾病。属性和水平的异质性也带来了挑战:结论:检测效果和检测率对受访者来说一直都很重要,因此决策者应优先考虑。准确性、成本和等待时间虽然也很重要,但不同研究之间存在差异,尽管总体成本的降低可能会提高接受率。患者和公众愿意为改进检测和临床医生而非保险提供商的参与付费。未来的研究应通过考虑社会人口特征、医疗系统覆盖范围和保险政策对偏好的影响,力求将研究结果具体化:降低遗传性癌症综合征基因检测的成本可能会提高接受率。个人最愿意为提高检测率、识别多种癌症以及与医生而非保险提供商共享检测结果的检测付费。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Decision Making
Medical Decision Making 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
146
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Decision Making offers rigorous and systematic approaches to decision making that are designed to improve the health and clinical care of individuals and to assist with health care policy development. Using the fundamentals of decision analysis and theory, economic evaluation, and evidence based quality assessment, Medical Decision Making presents both theoretical and practical statistical and modeling techniques and methods from a variety of disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Recalibrating an Established Microsimulation Model to Capture Trends and Projections of Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality. Development of a Microsimulation Model to Project the Future Prevalence of Childhood Cancer in Ontario, Canada. How Inclusive Are Patient Decision Aids for People with Limited Health Literacy? An Analysis of Understandability Criteria and the Communication about Options and Probabilities. Communicating on Vaccine Benefit-Risk Ratios: A Discrete-Choice Experiment among Health Care Professionals and the General Population in France. A Parsimonious Approach to Remediate Concerns about QALY-Based Discrimination.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1