IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v7y2014i3p271-282.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Stated Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Critical Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • S. Wortley
  • G. Wong
  • A. Kieu
  • K. Howard

Abstract

Understanding and incorporating individuals’ preferences in decision making is increasingly considered essential in the health field. Data from DCEs can provide valuable insights into the trade-offs individuals are willing to undertake in respect to CRC screening. Such insights can be used by decision makers to identify screening tests that could maximize informed uptake. It is likely that, with better reporting and evolving methodology, the contribution that DCEs can make to such debates will increase. Copyright Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Suggested Citation

  • S. Wortley & G. Wong & A. Kieu & K. Howard, 2014. "Assessing Stated Preferences for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Critical Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(3), pages 271-282, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:7:y:2014:i:3:p:271-282
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-014-0054-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s40271-014-0054-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-014-0054-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Whynes, David K. & Frew, Emma & Wolstenholme, Jane L., 2003. "A comparison of two methods for eliciting contingent valuations of colorectal cancer screening," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 555-574, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ellen M. Janssen & Jodi B. Segal & John F. P. Bridges, 2016. "A Framework for Instrument Development of a Choice Experiment: An Application to Type 2 Diabetes," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 9(5), pages 465-479, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hurlimann, Anna C., 2009. "Water supply in regional Victoria Australia: A review of the water cartage industry and willingness to pay for recycled water," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 262-268.
    2. Trine Bergmo & Silje Wangberg, 2007. "Patients’ willingness to pay for electronic communication with their general practitioner," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 8(2), pages 105-110, June.
    3. Daniel E. Jonas & Betsy Bryant Shilliday & W. Russell Laundon & Michael Pignone, 2010. "Patient Time Requirements for Anticoagulation Therapy with Warfarin," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(2), pages 206-216, March.
    4. Olivier Chanel & Khaled Makhloufi & Mohammad Abu-Zaineh, 2017. "Can a Circular Payment Card Format Effectively Elicit Preferences? Evidence From a Survey on a Mandatory Health Insurance Scheme in Tunisia," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 385-398, June.
    5. Greenberg, Dan & Bakhai, Ameet & Neumann, Peter J. & Cohen, David J., 2004. "Willingness to pay for avoiding coronary restenosis and repeat revascularization: results from a contingent valuation study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 207-216, November.
    6. Yves Arrighi & David Crainich & Véronique Flambard & Sophie Massin, 2022. "Personalized information and willingness to pay for non-financial risk prevention: An experiment," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 57-82, August.
    7. Kaisa Kotakorpi & Jani‐Petri Laamanen, 2010. "Welfare State and Life Satisfaction: Evidence from Public Health Care," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 77(307), pages 565-583, July.
    8. Tang, Chao-Hsiun & Liu, Jin-Tan & Chang, Ching-Wen & Chang, Wen-Ying, 2007. "Willingness to pay for drug abuse treatment: Results from a contingent valuation study in Taiwan," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 251-262, July.
    9. Zoë Philips & David K. Whynes & Mark Avis, 2006. "Testing the construct validity of willingness to pay valuations using objective information about risk and health benefit," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(2), pages 195-204, February.
    10. Mark Pennington & Manuel Gomes & Cam Donaldson, 2017. "Handling Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(6), pages 623-634, August.
    11. Jin‐Tan Liu & James K. Hammitt & Jung‐Der Wang & Meng‐Wen Tsou, 2005. "Valuation of the risk of SARS in Taiwan," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 83-91, January.
    12. Liu, Jin-Tan & Tsou, Meng-Wen & Hammitt, James K., 2009. "Willingness to pay for weight-control treatment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 211-218, July.
    13. Daniel E. Jonas & Louise B. Russell & Jon Chou & Michael Pignone, 2010. "Willingness‐to‐pay to avoid the time spent and discomfort associated with screening colonoscopy," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1193-1211, October.
    14. Nathalie Havet & Magali Morelle & Raphaël Remonnay & Marie-Odile Carrere, 2012. "Cancer patients’ willingness to pay for blood transfusions at home: results from a contingent valuation study in a French cancer network," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(3), pages 289-300, June.
    15. Daniel E. Jonas & Louise B. Russell & Robert S. Sandler & Jon Chou & Michael Pignone, 2008. "Value of Patient Time Invested in the Colonoscopy Screening Process: Time Requirements for Colonoscopy Study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(1), pages 56-65, January.
    16. Caroline Steigenberger & Magdalena Flatscher-Thoeni & Uwe Siebert & Andrea M. Leiter, 2022. "Determinants of willingness to pay for health services: a systematic review of contingent valuation studies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(9), pages 1455-1482, December.
    17. Sabina Sanghera & Emma Frew & Janesh Gupta & Joe Kai & Tracy Roberts, 2015. "Exploring the Use of Cost-Benefit Analysis to Compare Pharmaceutical Treatments for Menorrhagia," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(9), pages 957-965, September.
    18. David K. Whynes & Zoë Philips & Emma Frew, 2005. "Think of a number… any number?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(11), pages 1191-1195, November.
    19. David Whynes & Emma Frew & Jane Wolstenholme, 2005. "Willingness-to-Pay and Demand Curves: A Comparison of Results Obtained Using Different Elicitation Formats," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 369-386, December.
    20. Havet Nathalie & Morelle Magali & Remonnay Raphaël & Carrere Marie-Odile, 2011. "Valuing the Benefit for Cancer Patients of Receiving Blood Transfusions at Home," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-19, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:patien:v:7:y:2014:i:3:p:271-282. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.