» Articles » PMID: 19683432

What Determines Individuals' Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening Programmes? A Discrete Choice Experiment

Overview
Journal Eur J Cancer
Specialty Oncology
Date 2009 Aug 18
PMID 19683432
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: In many countries uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains low.

Aim: To assess how procedural characteristics of CRC screening programmes determine preferences for participation and how individuals weigh these against the perceived benefits from participation in CRC screening.

Methods: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among subjects in the age group of 50-75 years, including both screening-naïve subjects and participants of a CRC screening programme. Subjects were asked on their preferences for aspects of CRC screening programmes using scenarios based on pain, risk of complications, screening location, preparation, duration of procedure, screening interval and risk reduction of CRC-related death.

Results: The response was 31% (156/500) for screening-naïve and 57% (124/210) for CRC screening participants. All aspects proved to significantly influence the respondents' preferences. For both groups combined, respondents required an additional relative risk reduction of CRC-related death by a screening programme of 1% for every additional 10 min of duration, 5% in order to expose themselves to a small risk of complications, 10% to accept mild pain, 10% to undergo preparation with an enema, 12% to use 0.75l of oral preparation combined with 12h fasting and 32% to use an extensive bowel preparation. Screening intervals shorter than 10 years were significantly preferred to a 10-year screening interval.

Conclusion: This study shows that especially type of bowel preparation, risk reduction of CRC related death and length of screening interval influence CRC screening preferences. Furthermore, improving awareness on CRC mortality reduction by CRC screening may increase uptake.

Citing Articles

Public Preference Heterogeneity and Predicted Uptake Rate of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Screening Programs in Rural China: Discrete Choice Experiments and Latent Class Analysis.

Liu R, Li Q, Li Y, Wei W, Ma S, Wang J JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2023; 9:e42898.

PMID: 37428530 PMC: 10366669. DOI: 10.2196/42898.


Women's priorities towards ovarian cancer testing: a best-worst scaling study.

Hall R, Medina-Lara A, Hamilton W, Spencer A BMJ Open. 2022; 12(9):e061625.

PMID: 36581964 PMC: 9438192. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061625.


Attributes in stated preference elicitation studies on colorectal cancer screening and their relative importance for decision-making among screenees: a systematic review.

Brinkmann M, Fricke L, Diedrich L, Robra B, Krauth C, Dreier M Health Econ Rev. 2022; 12(1):49.

PMID: 36136248 PMC: 9494881. DOI: 10.1186/s13561-022-00394-8.


What can We Learn From High-Performing Screening Programs to Increase Bowel Cancer Screening Participation in Australia?.

Flander L, Dekker E, Andersen B, Larsen M, Steele R, Malila N Cancer Control. 2022; 29:10732748221121383.

PMID: 35969473 PMC: 9381723. DOI: 10.1177/10732748221121383.


Preferred Lung Cancer Screening Modalities in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Zhao Z, Du L, Wang L, Wang Y, Yang Y, Dong H Cancers (Basel). 2021; 13(23).

PMID: 34885217 PMC: 8656503. DOI: 10.3390/cancers13236110.