Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2013 Aug;13(4):513-22. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2013.814948.
To investigate the relationship between the framing of survival gains and the perceived value of cancer care.
Through a population-based survey of 2040 US adults, respondents were randomized to one of the two sets of hypothetical scenarios, each of which described the survival benefit for a new treatment as either an increase in median survival time (median survival), or an increase in the probability of survival for a given length of time (landmark survival). Each respondent was presented with two randomly selected scenarios with different prognosis and survival improvements, and asked about their willingness to pay (WTP) for the new treatments.
Predicted WTP increased with survival benefits and respondents' income, regardless of how survival benefits were described. Framing therapeutic benefits as improvements in landmark rather than median time survival increased the proportion of the population willing to pay for that gain by 11-35%, and the mean WTP amount by 42-72% in the scenarios we compared.
How survival benefits are described may influence the value people place on cancer care.
探讨生存获益的表述方式与癌症治疗认知价值之间的关系。
通过对 2040 名美国成年人进行基于人群的调查，将受访者随机分配到两组假设情景中的一组，每组情景均将新疗法的生存获益描述为中位生存时间的增加（中位生存）或特定时间段生存概率的增加（生存关键点）。向每位受访者呈现两种具有不同预后和生存改善的随机选择情景，并询问他们对新疗法的支付意愿（WTP）。
无论生存获益如何描述，预测的 WTP 均随生存获益和受访者收入的增加而增加。将治疗效益表述为生存关键点而非中位时间生存的改善，使愿意为该获益支付的人群比例增加了 11-35%，在我们比较的情景中，平均 WTP 金额增加了 42-72%。
生存获益的描述方式可能会影响人们对癌症治疗的重视程度。
