What Factors Influence Non-Participation Most in Colorectal Cancer Screening? A Discrete Choice Experiment

被引:19
作者
de Bekker-Grob, Esther W. [1 ,2 ]
Donkers, Bas [2 ,3 ]
Veldwijk, Jorien [1 ,2 ]
Jonker, Marcel F. [1 ,2 ]
Buis, Sylvia [4 ]
Huisman, Jan [5 ]
Bindels, Patrick [6 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Hlth Policy & Management, POB 1738, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Choice Modelling Ctr, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[3] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Econ, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[4] Gezondheidsctr Ommoord, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[5] Het Doktershuis, Ridderkerk, Netherlands
[6] Erasmus MC, Univ Med Ctr Rotterdam, Dept Gen Practice, Rotterdam, Netherlands
关键词
CRITICAL HEALTH LITERACY; PREFERENCES; COLONOSCOPY; VALIDATION; ATTRIBUTES; MORTALITY; NUMERACY; POLYP; SIZE; CARE;
D O I
10.1007/s40271-020-00477-w
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objective Non-participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening needs to be decreased to achieve its full potential as a public health strategy. To facilitate successful implementation of CRC screening towards unscreened individuals, this study aimed to quantify the impact of screening and individual characteristics on non-participation in CRC screening. Methods An online discrete choice experiment partly based on qualitative research was used among 406 representatives of the Dutch general population aged 55-75 years. In the discrete choice experiment, respondents were offered a series of choices between CRC screening scenarios that differed on five characteristics: effectiveness of the faecal immunochemical screening test, risk of a false-negative outcome, test frequency, waiting time for faecal immunochemical screening test results and waiting time for a colonoscopy follow-up test. The discrete choice experiment data were analysed in a systematic manner using random-utility-maximisation choice processes with scale and/or preference heterogeneity (based on 15 individual characteristics) and/or random intercepts. Results Screening characteristics proved to influence non-participation in CRC screening (21.7-28.0% non-participation rate), but an individual's characteristics had an even higher impact on CRC screening non-participation (8.4-75.5% non-participation rate); particularly the individual's attitude towards CRC screening followed by whether the individual had participated in a cancer screening programme before, the decision style of the individual and the educational level of the individual. Our findings provided a high degree of confidence in the internal-external validity. Conclusions This study showed that although screening characteristics proved to influence non-participation in CRC screening, a respondent's characteristics had a much higher impact on CRC screening non-participation. Policy makers and physicians can use our study insights to improve and tailor their communication plans regarding (CRC) screening for unscreened individuals.
引用
收藏
页码:269 / 281
页数:13
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]   Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial [J].
Atkin, Wendy S. ;
Edwards, Rob ;
Kralj-Hans, Ines ;
Wooldrage, Kate ;
Hart, Andrew R. ;
Northover, John M. A. ;
Parkin, D. Max ;
Wardle, Jane ;
Duffy, Stephen W. ;
Cuzick, Jack .
LANCET, 2010, 375 (9726) :1624-1633
[2]   The Effect of Presenting Information about Invasive Follow-Up Testing on Individuals' Noninvasive Colorectal Cancer Screening Participation Decision: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment [J].
Benning, Tim M. ;
Dellaert, Benedict G. C. ;
Severens, Johan L. ;
Dirksen, Carmen D. .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2014, 17 (05) :578-587
[3]   Screening for Colorectal Cancer US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement [J].
Bibbins-Domingo, Kirsten ;
Grossman, David C. ;
Curry, Susan J. ;
Davidson, Karina W. ;
Epling, John W., Jr. ;
Garcia, Francisco A. R. ;
Gillman, Matthew W. ;
Harper, Diane M. ;
Kemper, Alex R. ;
Krist, Alex H. ;
Kurth, Ann E. ;
Landefeld, C. Seth ;
Mangione, Carol M. ;
Owens, Douglas K. ;
Phillips, William R. ;
Phipps, Maureen G. ;
Pignone, Michael P. ;
Siu, Albert L. .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2016, 315 (23) :2564-2575
[4]  
Bierlaire M., 2016, 160628 TRANSPOR
[5]   Can healthcare choice be predicted using stated preference data? [J].
de Bekker-Grob, E. W. ;
Donkers, B. ;
Bliemer, M. C. J. ;
Veldwijk, J. ;
Swait, J. D. .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 2020, 246
[6]   Are Healthcare Choices Predictable? The Impact of Discrete Choice Experiment Designs and Models [J].
de Bekker-Grob, Esther W. ;
Swait, Joffre D. ;
Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun ;
Bliemer, Michiel C. J. ;
Jonker, Marcel F. ;
Veldwijk, Jorien ;
Cong, Karen ;
Rose, John M. ;
Donkers, Bas .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2019, 22 (09) :1050-1062
[7]   Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide [J].
de Bekker-Grob, Esther W. ;
Donkers, Bas ;
Jonker, Marcel F. ;
Stolk, Elly A. .
PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2015, 8 (05) :373-384
[8]   Complexity Effects in Choice Experiment-Based Models [J].
Dellaert, Benedict G. C. ;
Donkers, Bas ;
van Soest, Arthur .
JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, 2012, 49 (03) :424-434
[9]   Measuring numeracy without a Math test: Development of the subjective numeracy scale [J].
Fagerlin, Angela ;
Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J. ;
Ubel, Peter A. ;
Jankovic, Aleksandra ;
Derry, Holly A. ;
Smith, Dylan M. .
MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2007, 27 (05) :672-680
[10]  
Glanz K., 2015, Health Behavior: Theory, Research, and Practice