Value judgments for priority setting criteria in genetic testing: A discrete choice experiment

被引:17
|
作者
Severin, Franziska [1 ]
Hess, Wolfgang [2 ,3 ]
Schmidtke, Joerg [4 ]
Muelhlbacher, Axel [5 ]
Rogowski, Wolf [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen, German Res Ctr Environm Hlth GmbH, Inst Hlth Econ & Hlth Care Management IGM, D-85764 Neuherberg, Germany
[2] Lund Univ, Dept Econ, S-22007 Lund, Sweden
[3] Ctr Econ Demog, S-22007 Lund, Sweden
[4] Hannover Med Sch, Inst Human Genet, D-30625 Hannover, Germany
[5] Hsch Neubrandenburg, IGM, D-17033 Neubrandenburg, Germany
[6] Univ Munich, Inst & Outpatient Clin Occupat Social & Environm, Ctr Clin, D-80336 Munich, Germany
基金
欧盟第七框架计划;
关键词
Discrete choice experiment; Genetic testing; Resource allocation; Stakeholder; HEALTH-CARE; PATIENT PREFERENCES; PRIORITIZATION; EMPOWERMENT; TECHNOLOGY; SERVICES; OUTCOMES; ETHICS; EQUITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.04.013
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
As our understanding of genetics has increased, so has the number of genetic tests that have entered clinical practice. Given the need of many European health care systems to contain costs, the question of how to prioritise genetic tests fairly has become an emerging concern. This study uses a discrete-choice experiment to assess the value judgements of clinical geneticists, patient representatives and other stakeholders regarding the prioritisation of genetic tests. The respondents chose between two hypothetical scenarios that differed in severity of the disease, risk of the disease, aim of the test, medical benefit of the test, and costs of the test. Standard logit models and mixed effects models were used to estimate the weights different stakeholders attached to attribute levels. Responses from 594 participants were analysed. The most highly valued attribute levels were a proven medical benefit of the test, high risk of having the disease and low costs of the test. Results also showed that rankings differ between clinical geneticists and other stakeholders. The priority weights determined within this study can inform the policy debate and improve the consistency of prioritisation in genetics. Further stakeholder deliberation is needed to explore their most appropriate use in decision practice. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:164 / 173
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Criteria for priority setting of HIV/AIDS interventions in Thailand: a discrete choice experiment
    Sitaporn Youngkong
    Rob Baltussen
    Sripen Tantivess
    Xander Koolman
    Yot Teerawattananon
    [J]. BMC Health Services Research, 10
  • [2] Criteria for priority setting of HIV/AIDS interventions in Thailand: a discrete choice experiment
    Youngkong, Sitaporn
    Baltussen, Rob
    Tantivess, Sripen
    Koolman, Xander
    Teerawattananon, Yot
    [J]. BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2010, 10
  • [3] Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment
    V. Meusel
    E. Mentzakis
    P. Baji
    G. Fiorentini
    F. Paolucci
    [J]. International Journal of Health Economics and Management, 2023, 23 : 411 - 431
  • [4] Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment
    Meusel, V.
    Mentzakis, E.
    Baji, P.
    Fiorentini, G.
    Paolucci, F.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 2023, 23 (03) : 411 - 431
  • [5] What Aspects of Illness Influence Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the UK
    Morrell, Liz
    Buchanan, James
    Rees, Sian
    Barker, Richard W.
    Wordsworth, Sarah
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2021, 39 (12) : 1443 - 1454
  • [6] Priority Setting in the Austrian Healthcare System: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment and Implications for Mental Health
    Mentzakis, Emmanouil
    Paolucci, Francesco
    Rubicko, Georg
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MENTAL HEALTH POLICY AND ECONOMICS, 2014, 17 (02): : 61 - 73
  • [7] What Aspects of Illness Influence Public Preferences for Healthcare Priority Setting? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the UK
    Liz Morrell
    James Buchanan
    Sian Rees
    Richard W. Barker
    Sarah Wordsworth
    [J]. PharmacoEconomics, 2021, 39 : 1443 - 1454
  • [8] Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments
    Severin, Franziska
    Schmidtke, Joerg
    Muehlbacher, Axel
    Rogowski, Wolf H.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2013, 21 (11) : 1202 - 1208
  • [9] Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments
    Franziska Severin
    Jörg Schmidtke
    Axel Mühlbacher
    Wolf H Rogowski
    [J]. European Journal of Human Genetics, 2013, 21 : 1202 - 1208
  • [10] The value of consideration data in a discrete choice experiment
    Assele, Samson Yaekob
    Meulders, Michel
    Vandebroek, Martina
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CHOICE MODELLING, 2022, 45