Author
Listed:
- Amber Salisbury
(University of Sydney
University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW)
- Sarah Norris
(University of Sydney)
- Alison Pearce
(University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW
University of Sydney)
- Kirsten Howard
(University of Sydney)
Abstract
Background Non-invasive prenatal testing has the potential to be a useful genetic screening tool in Australia. However, concerns have been raised about its cost, commercial provision, the psychological impacts of the screening process, and disparities in access experienced by rural and regional communities. Aims The aims of this study are (1) to estimate Australian preferences for features of prenatal screening; (2) to explore potential variations in preferences between metropolitan and rural/regional communities; (3) to estimate the extent to which respondents are willing to trade-off between attributes, using willingness to pay (WTP) and willingness to wait estimates. Methods A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted with 12 choice tasks. The DCE recruited participants from metropolitan (n = 160) and rural/regional (n = 168) locations across Australia. Mixed logit and latent class analyses were conducted and WTP and willingness to wait were calculated. Results Both metropolitan and rural/regional preferences were significantly impacted by the false-positive rate, false-negative rate, and cost. In addition, rural preferences were significantly impacted by the scope of the conditions covered, the inconclusive rate, and wait times. The number of screening tests and revealing the sex of the foetus were not significant within either group. Willingness to pay estimates ranged from AU$13 to avoid a test with a 1% increase in the false-positive rate to AU$323 to screen for a wide range of conditions. Conclusions This study highlights the importance of considering differing preferences between rural and metropolitan populations when delivering prenatal screening. Further, this study provides Australian-specific WTP estimates to be incorporated into economic evaluations.
Suggested Citation
Amber Salisbury & Sarah Norris & Alison Pearce & Kirsten Howard, 2025.
"Australian Preferences for Prenatal Screening: A Discrete Choice Experiment Comparing Metropolitan and Rural/Regional Areas,"
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 493-506, May.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00938-5
DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00938-5
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00938-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.