Cargando…

Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample

OBJECTIVES: Lung cancer screening (LCS) is effective in reducing lung cancer mortality, but there is limited information available regarding preferences among high‐risk individuals concerning LCS. In this study, we use a conjoint valuation analysis (CVA) to better understand which LCS attributes mos...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Byrne, Margaret M., Thurer, Richard J., Studts, Jamie L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6745859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31385463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2445
_version_ 1783451607054155776
author Byrne, Margaret M.
Thurer, Richard J.
Studts, Jamie L.
author_facet Byrne, Margaret M.
Thurer, Richard J.
Studts, Jamie L.
author_sort Byrne, Margaret M.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Lung cancer screening (LCS) is effective in reducing lung cancer mortality, but there is limited information available regarding preferences among high‐risk individuals concerning LCS. In this study, we use a conjoint valuation analysis (CVA) to better understand which LCS attributes most affect LCS preferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We implemented a web‐based nationally representative survey that included a full‐profile CVA exercise. Participants were over the age of 45, had at least a 20 pack‐year smoking history, and no history of lung cancer. The CVA instrument included five LCS attributes, and additional survey items collected demographic and psychosocial information. RESULTS: Participants (n = 210) had a mean age of 61 (SD 8.5) years, approximately half were female (51.9%), and were racially/ethnically diverse. Average relative importance of the LCS program attributes was (from high to low): out of pocket costs (27.3 ± 17.7); provider recommendation (24.8 ± 13.4); mortality reduction (17.2 ± 8.9); false‐positive rate (15.8 ± 10.4); and ease of access (14.8 ± 7.3). There was large variation among individuals, but few significant associations of propensity to screen with individual demographic characteristics. Average screening propensity across individuals (1‐9 scale) was 3.63 ± 1.6, and average rates of individual scenarios ranged from 2.60 ± 2.00 to 5.57 ± 2.13, indicating low inclination for screening. CONCLUSIONS: We found that overall propensity for screening is low in a high‐risk population, and that out of pocket costs were of greater importance to potential screeners than mortality reduction or false‐positive rates. Thus, individuals considering or eligible for LCS need additional education and support regarding the LCS landscape in order to achieve informed decision making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6745859
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67458592019-09-18 Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample Byrne, Margaret M. Thurer, Richard J. Studts, Jamie L. Cancer Med Cancer Prevention OBJECTIVES: Lung cancer screening (LCS) is effective in reducing lung cancer mortality, but there is limited information available regarding preferences among high‐risk individuals concerning LCS. In this study, we use a conjoint valuation analysis (CVA) to better understand which LCS attributes most affect LCS preferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We implemented a web‐based nationally representative survey that included a full‐profile CVA exercise. Participants were over the age of 45, had at least a 20 pack‐year smoking history, and no history of lung cancer. The CVA instrument included five LCS attributes, and additional survey items collected demographic and psychosocial information. RESULTS: Participants (n = 210) had a mean age of 61 (SD 8.5) years, approximately half were female (51.9%), and were racially/ethnically diverse. Average relative importance of the LCS program attributes was (from high to low): out of pocket costs (27.3 ± 17.7); provider recommendation (24.8 ± 13.4); mortality reduction (17.2 ± 8.9); false‐positive rate (15.8 ± 10.4); and ease of access (14.8 ± 7.3). There was large variation among individuals, but few significant associations of propensity to screen with individual demographic characteristics. Average screening propensity across individuals (1‐9 scale) was 3.63 ± 1.6, and average rates of individual scenarios ranged from 2.60 ± 2.00 to 5.57 ± 2.13, indicating low inclination for screening. CONCLUSIONS: We found that overall propensity for screening is low in a high‐risk population, and that out of pocket costs were of greater importance to potential screeners than mortality reduction or false‐positive rates. Thus, individuals considering or eligible for LCS need additional education and support regarding the LCS landscape in order to achieve informed decision making. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-08-06 /pmc/articles/PMC6745859/ /pubmed/31385463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2445 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Cancer Prevention
Byrne, Margaret M.
Thurer, Richard J.
Studts, Jamie L.
Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample
title Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample
title_full Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample
title_fullStr Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample
title_full_unstemmed Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample
title_short Individual decision making about lung cancer screening: A conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample
title_sort individual decision making about lung cancer screening: a conjoint analysis of perspectives among a high‐risk national sample
topic Cancer Prevention
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6745859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31385463
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2445
work_keys_str_mv AT byrnemargaretm individualdecisionmakingaboutlungcancerscreeningaconjointanalysisofperspectivesamongahighrisknationalsample
AT thurerrichardj individualdecisionmakingaboutlungcancerscreeningaconjointanalysisofperspectivesamongahighrisknationalsample
AT studtsjamiel individualdecisionmakingaboutlungcancerscreeningaconjointanalysisofperspectivesamongahighrisknationalsample