Cargando…

Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts

OBJECTIVE: To explore what Australian experts value in breast screening, how these values are conceptualised and prioritised, and how they inform experts’ reasoning and judgement about the Australian breast-screening programme. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on interviews with experts. PARTICIPANTS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parker, Lisa, Rychetnik, Lucie, Carter, Stacy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4442211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25995235
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006333
_version_ 1782372872128299008
author Parker, Lisa
Rychetnik, Lucie
Carter, Stacy
author_facet Parker, Lisa
Rychetnik, Lucie
Carter, Stacy
author_sort Parker, Lisa
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To explore what Australian experts value in breast screening, how these values are conceptualised and prioritised, and how they inform experts’ reasoning and judgement about the Australian breast-screening programme. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on interviews with experts. PARTICIPANTS: 33 experts, including clinicians, programme managers, policymakers, advocates and researchers selected for their recognisable influence in the Australian breast-screening setting. SETTING: Australian breast-screening policy, practice and research settings. RESULTS: Experts expressed 2 types of values: ethical values (about what was good, important or right) and epistemological values (about how evidence should be created and used). Ethical values included delivering benefit, avoiding harm, promoting autonomy, fairness, cost effectiveness, accountability, professionalism and transparency. Epistemological values informed experts’ arguments about prioritising and evaluating evidence methodology, source population and professional interests. Some values were conceptualised differently by experts: for example, delivering benefit could mean reducing breast cancer mortality, reducing all-cause mortality, reducing mortality in younger women, reducing need for aggressive treatment, and/or reassuring women they were cancer free. When values came into conflict, experts prioritised them differently: for example, when experts perceived a conflict between delivering benefits and promoting autonomy, there were differences in which value was prioritised. We explain the complexity of the relationship between held values and experts’ overall views on breast cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Experts’ positions in breast screening are influenced by evidence and a wide range of ethical and epistemological values. We conclude that discussions about values should be a regular part of breast-screening review in order to build understanding between those who hold different positions, and provide a mechanism for responding to these differences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4442211
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44422112015-05-28 Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts Parker, Lisa Rychetnik, Lucie Carter, Stacy BMJ Open Ethics OBJECTIVE: To explore what Australian experts value in breast screening, how these values are conceptualised and prioritised, and how they inform experts’ reasoning and judgement about the Australian breast-screening programme. DESIGN: Qualitative study based on interviews with experts. PARTICIPANTS: 33 experts, including clinicians, programme managers, policymakers, advocates and researchers selected for their recognisable influence in the Australian breast-screening setting. SETTING: Australian breast-screening policy, practice and research settings. RESULTS: Experts expressed 2 types of values: ethical values (about what was good, important or right) and epistemological values (about how evidence should be created and used). Ethical values included delivering benefit, avoiding harm, promoting autonomy, fairness, cost effectiveness, accountability, professionalism and transparency. Epistemological values informed experts’ arguments about prioritising and evaluating evidence methodology, source population and professional interests. Some values were conceptualised differently by experts: for example, delivering benefit could mean reducing breast cancer mortality, reducing all-cause mortality, reducing mortality in younger women, reducing need for aggressive treatment, and/or reassuring women they were cancer free. When values came into conflict, experts prioritised them differently: for example, when experts perceived a conflict between delivering benefits and promoting autonomy, there were differences in which value was prioritised. We explain the complexity of the relationship between held values and experts’ overall views on breast cancer screening. CONCLUSIONS: Experts’ positions in breast screening are influenced by evidence and a wide range of ethical and epistemological values. We conclude that discussions about values should be a regular part of breast-screening review in order to build understanding between those who hold different positions, and provide a mechanism for responding to these differences. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4442211/ /pubmed/25995235 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006333 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Ethics
Parker, Lisa
Rychetnik, Lucie
Carter, Stacy
Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts
title Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts
title_full Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts
title_fullStr Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts
title_full_unstemmed Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts
title_short Values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with Australian experts
title_sort values in breast cancer screening: an empirical study with australian experts
topic Ethics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4442211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25995235
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006333
work_keys_str_mv AT parkerlisa valuesinbreastcancerscreeninganempiricalstudywithaustralianexperts
AT rychetniklucie valuesinbreastcancerscreeninganempiricalstudywithaustralianexperts
AT carterstacy valuesinbreastcancerscreeninganempiricalstudywithaustralianexperts