Cargando…

Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening

BACKGROUND: Emerging developments in nanomedicine allow the development of genome-based technologies for non-invasive and individualised screening for diseases such as colorectal cancer. The main objective of this study was to measure user preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a nanopill...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Catharina GM, Fermont, Jilles M, van Til, Janine A, IJzerman, Maarten J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4000055/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24642027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-18
_version_ 1782313572642062336
author Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Catharina GM
Fermont, Jilles M
van Til, Janine A
IJzerman, Maarten J
author_facet Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Catharina GM
Fermont, Jilles M
van Til, Janine A
IJzerman, Maarten J
author_sort Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Catharina GM
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Emerging developments in nanomedicine allow the development of genome-based technologies for non-invasive and individualised screening for diseases such as colorectal cancer. The main objective of this study was to measure user preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a nanopill. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was used to estimate the preferences for five competing diagnostic techniques including the nanopill and iFOBT. Alternative screening scenarios were described using five attributes namely: preparation involved, sensitivity, specificity, complication rate and testing frequency. Fourteen random and two fixed choice tasks, each consisting of three alternatives, were offered to 2225 individuals. Data were analysed using the McFadden conditional logit model. RESULTS: Thirteen hundred and fifty-six respondents completed the questionnaire. The most important attributes (and preferred levels) were the screening technique (nanopill), sensitivity (100%) and preparation (no preparation). Stated screening uptake for the nanopill was 79%, compared to 76% for iFOBT. In the case of screening with the nanopill, the percentage of people preferring not to be screened would be reduced from 19.2% (iFOBT) to 16.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the expected benefits of nanotechnology based colorectal cancer screening are improved screening uptake, assuming more accurate test results and less preparation involved, the relative preference of the nanopill is only slightly higher than the iFOBT. Estimating user preferences during the development of diagnostic technologies could be used to identify relative performance, including perceived benefits and harms compared to competitors allowing for significant changes to be made throughout the process of development.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4000055
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40000552014-05-08 Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Catharina GM Fermont, Jilles M van Til, Janine A IJzerman, Maarten J BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research Article BACKGROUND: Emerging developments in nanomedicine allow the development of genome-based technologies for non-invasive and individualised screening for diseases such as colorectal cancer. The main objective of this study was to measure user preferences for colorectal cancer screening using a nanopill. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was used to estimate the preferences for five competing diagnostic techniques including the nanopill and iFOBT. Alternative screening scenarios were described using five attributes namely: preparation involved, sensitivity, specificity, complication rate and testing frequency. Fourteen random and two fixed choice tasks, each consisting of three alternatives, were offered to 2225 individuals. Data were analysed using the McFadden conditional logit model. RESULTS: Thirteen hundred and fifty-six respondents completed the questionnaire. The most important attributes (and preferred levels) were the screening technique (nanopill), sensitivity (100%) and preparation (no preparation). Stated screening uptake for the nanopill was 79%, compared to 76% for iFOBT. In the case of screening with the nanopill, the percentage of people preferring not to be screened would be reduced from 19.2% (iFOBT) to 16.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Although the expected benefits of nanotechnology based colorectal cancer screening are improved screening uptake, assuming more accurate test results and less preparation involved, the relative preference of the nanopill is only slightly higher than the iFOBT. Estimating user preferences during the development of diagnostic technologies could be used to identify relative performance, including perceived benefits and harms compared to competitors allowing for significant changes to be made throughout the process of development. BioMed Central 2014-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4000055/ /pubmed/24642027 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-18 Text en Copyright © 2014 Groothuis-Oudshoorn et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Catharina GM
Fermont, Jilles M
van Til, Janine A
IJzerman, Maarten J
Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening
title Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening
title_full Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening
title_fullStr Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening
title_full_unstemmed Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening
title_short Public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening
title_sort public stated preferences and predicted uptake for genome-based colorectal cancer screening
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4000055/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24642027
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6947-14-18
work_keys_str_mv AT groothuisoudshoorncatharinagm publicstatedpreferencesandpredicteduptakeforgenomebasedcolorectalcancerscreening
AT fermontjillesm publicstatedpreferencesandpredicteduptakeforgenomebasedcolorectalcancerscreening
AT vantiljaninea publicstatedpreferencesandpredicteduptakeforgenomebasedcolorectalcancerscreening
AT ijzermanmaartenj publicstatedpreferencesandpredicteduptakeforgenomebasedcolorectalcancerscreening