• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Estimating Preferences for Complex Health Technologies: Lessons Learned and Implications for Personalized Medicine.评估对复杂医疗技术的偏好:经验教训及对个性化医疗的启示
Value Health. 2017 Jan;20(1):32-39. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.08.737.
2
Payer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Genomic Precision Medicine: A Discrete Choice Experiment.支付方对基因组精准医疗的偏好及支付意愿:一项离散选择实验
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2020 Apr;26(4):529-537. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2020.26.4.529.
3
When bins blur: Patient perspectives on categories of results from clinical whole genome sequencing.当分类模糊时:患者对临床全基因组测序结果类别的看法。
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Apr-Jun;8(2):82-88. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2017.1287786. Epub 2017 Jan 27.
4
Provider preferences for resolving uncertainty and avoiding harms in precision medicine: a discrete choice experiment.在精准医学中解决不确定性和避免伤害的提供者偏好:一项离散选择实验。
Per Med. 2020 Sep;17(5):389-398. doi: 10.2217/pme-2020-0018. Epub 2020 Aug 17.
5
Societal preferences for the return of incidental findings from clinical genomic sequencing: a discrete-choice experiment.临床基因组测序中偶然发现结果反馈的社会偏好:一项离散选择实验
CMAJ. 2015 Apr 7;187(6):E190-E197. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.140697. Epub 2015 Mar 9.
6
Parents perspectives on whole genome sequencing for their children: qualified enthusiasm?家长对为孩子进行全基因组测序的看法:有条件的热情?
J Med Ethics. 2017 Aug;43(8):535-539. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2016-103564. Epub 2016 Nov 25.
7
Preference heterogeneity with respect to whole genome sequencing. A discrete choice experiment among parents of children with rare genetic diseases.对全基因组测序的偏好异质性。一项针对罕见遗传病患儿父母的离散选择实验。
Soc Sci Med. 2018 Oct;214:125-132. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.08.015. Epub 2018 Aug 21.
8
The MedSeq Project: a randomized trial of integrating whole genome sequencing into clinical medicine.MedSeq 项目:将全基因组测序整合到临床医学中的一项随机试验。
Trials. 2014 Mar 20;15:85. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-85.
9
What are people willing to pay for whole-genome sequencing information, and who decides what they receive?人们愿意为全基因组测序信息支付多少钱,又由谁来决定他们能得到什么信息呢?
Genet Med. 2016 Dec;18(12):1295-1302. doi: 10.1038/gim.2016.61. Epub 2016 Jun 2.
10
Australian Public Preferences for the Funding of New Health Technologies: A Comparison of Discrete Choice and Profile Case Best-Worst Scaling Methods.澳大利亚公众对新医疗技术资金投入的偏好:离散选择法与轮廓案例最佳-最差尺度法的比较
Med Decis Making. 2014 Jul;34(5):638-54. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14526640. Epub 2014 Apr 8.

引用本文的文献

1
What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability.患者偏好科学的下一步是什么?互操作性、标准化和可转移性。
Patient. 2025 Mar;18(2):101-108. doi: 10.1007/s40271-025-00727-9. Epub 2025 Jan 28.
2
Should Scotland provide genome-wide sequencing for the diagnosis of rare developmental disorders? A cost-effectiveness analysis.苏格兰是否应提供全基因组测序用于罕见发育障碍的诊断?一项成本效益分析。
Eur J Health Econ. 2025 Apr;26(3):503-512. doi: 10.1007/s10198-024-01717-8. Epub 2024 Sep 9.
3
QALYs and rare diseases: exploring the responsiveness of SF-6D, EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D following genomic testing for childhood and adult-onset rare genetic conditions in Australia.健康效用值(QALYs)与罕见病:澳大利亚儿童和成人发病罕见遗传疾病基因检测后 SF-6D、EQ-5D-5L 和 AQoL-8D 的反应性研究。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2023 Dec 12;21(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s12955-023-02216-9.
4
Comment on: Taking the Shortcut: Simplifying Heuristics in Discrete Choice Experiments.关于《走捷径:简化离散选择实验中的启发法》的评论
Patient. 2023 Jul;16(4):289-292. doi: 10.1007/s40271-023-00629-8. Epub 2023 May 26.
5
Cost-Effectiveness of Targeted Exome Analysis as a Diagnostic Test in Glomerular Diseases.靶向外显子组分析作为肾小球疾病诊断检测方法的成本效益
Kidney Int Rep. 2021 Sep 8;6(11):2850-2861. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2021.08.028. eCollection 2021 Nov.
6
A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments and Conjoint Analysis on Genetic Testing.关于基因检测的离散选择实验和联合分析的系统评价。
Patient. 2022 Jan;15(1):39-54. doi: 10.1007/s40271-021-00531-1. Epub 2021 Jun 4.
7
Exome sequencing in clinical settings: preferences and experiences of parents of children with rare diseases (SEQUAPRE study).外显子组测序在临床环境中的应用:罕见病患儿父母的偏好和体验(SEQUAPRE 研究)。
Eur J Hum Genet. 2019 May;27(5):701-710. doi: 10.1038/s41431-018-0332-y. Epub 2019 Feb 1.
8
Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.健康经济学中的离散选择实验:过去、现在和未来。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2019 Feb;37(2):201-226. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2.

本文引用的文献

1
Statistical Methods for the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments: A Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force.离散选择实验分析的统计方法:药物经济学与结果研究国际协会联合分析良好研究实践特别工作组报告
Value Health. 2016 Jun;19(4):300-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004. Epub 2016 May 12.
2
What are people willing to pay for whole-genome sequencing information, and who decides what they receive?人们愿意为全基因组测序信息支付多少钱,又由谁来决定他们能得到什么信息呢?
Genet Med. 2016 Dec;18(12):1295-1302. doi: 10.1038/gim.2016.61. Epub 2016 Jun 2.
3
Choice Experiments to Quantify Preferences for Health and Healthcare: State of the Practice.量化健康和医疗保健偏好的选择实验:实践现状
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2016 Jun;14(3):253-66. doi: 10.1007/s40258-016-0232-7.
4
"Is It Worth Knowing?" Focus Group Participants' Perceived Utility of Genomic Preconception Carrier Screening.“了解它是否值得?”焦点小组参与者对基因组孕前携带者筛查的感知效用
J Genet Couns. 2016 Feb;25(1):135-45. doi: 10.1007/s10897-015-9851-7. Epub 2015 Jun 21.
5
Can genomic medicine improve financial sustainability of health systems?基因组医学能否提高卫生系统的财务可持续性?
Mol Diagn Ther. 2015 Apr;19(2):71-7. doi: 10.1007/s40291-015-0138-3.
6
Societal preferences for the return of incidental findings from clinical genomic sequencing: a discrete-choice experiment.临床基因组测序中偶然发现结果反馈的社会偏好:一项离散选择实验
CMAJ. 2015 Apr 7;187(6):E190-E197. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.140697. Epub 2015 Mar 9.
7
Diagnostic clinical genome and exome sequencing.诊断性临床基因组和外显子组测序
N Engl J Med. 2014 Jun 19;370(25):2418-25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1312543.
8
The MedSeq Project: a randomized trial of integrating whole genome sequencing into clinical medicine.MedSeq 项目:将全基因组测序整合到临床医学中的一项随机试验。
Trials. 2014 Mar 20;15:85. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-85.
9
Characterizing genetic variants for clinical action.鉴定用于临床行动的基因变异。
Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2014 Mar;166C(1):93-104. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.31386. Epub 2014 Mar 13.
10
Social and behavioral research in genomic sequencing: approaches from the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium Outcomes and Measures Working Group.基因组测序中的社会与行为研究:来自临床测序探索性研究联盟结果与测量工作组的方法
Genet Med. 2014 Oct;16(10):727-35. doi: 10.1038/gim.2014.26. Epub 2014 Mar 13.

评估对复杂医疗技术的偏好:经验教训及对个性化医疗的启示

Estimating Preferences for Complex Health Technologies: Lessons Learned and Implications for Personalized Medicine.

作者信息

Marshall Deborah A, Gonzalez Juan Marcos, MacDonald Karen V, Johnson F Reed

机构信息

Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Research Triangle Institute, Durham, NC, USA.

出版信息

Value Health. 2017 Jan;20(1):32-39. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.08.737.

DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2016.08.737
PMID:28212966
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5319756/
Abstract

We examine key study design challenges of using stated-preference methods to estimate the value of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) as a specific example of genomic testing. Assessing the value of WGS is complex because WGS provides multiple findings, some of which can be incidental in nature and unrelated to the specific health concerns that motivated the test. In addition, WGS results can include actionable findings (variants considered to be clinically useful and can be acted on), findings for which evidence for best clinical action is not available (variants considered clinically valid but do not meet as high of a standard for clinical usefulness), and findings of unknown significance. We consider three key challenges encountered in designing our national study on the value of WGS-layers of uncertainty, potential downstream consequences with endogenous aspects, and both positive and negative utility associated with testing information-and potential solutions as strategies to address these challenges. We conceptualized the decision to acquire WGS information as a series of sequential choices that are resolved separately. To determine the value of WGS information at the initial decision to undergo WGS, we used contingent valuation questions, and to elicit respondent preferences for reducing risks of health problems and the consequences of taking the steps to reduce these risks, we used a discrete-choice experiment. We conclude by considering the implications for evaluating the value of other complex health technologies that involve multiple forms of uncertainty.

摘要

我们以全基因组测序(WGS)作为基因检测的一个具体例子,研究使用陈述性偏好方法来估计其价值时关键的研究设计挑战。评估WGS的价值很复杂,因为WGS会提供多种结果,其中一些可能本质上是偶然的,与促使进行检测的特定健康问题无关。此外,WGS结果可能包括可采取行动的结果(被认为具有临床实用性且可据此采取行动的变异)、尚无最佳临床行动证据的结果(被认为具有临床有效性但未达到同样高临床实用性标准的变异)以及意义不明的结果。我们考虑了在设计关于WGS价值的全国性研究时遇到的三个关键挑战——不确定性层面、具有内生因素的潜在下游后果以及与检测信息相关的正负效用——以及作为应对这些挑战策略的潜在解决方案。我们将获取WGS信息的决策概念化为一系列分别解决的连续选择。为了在进行WGS的初始决策时确定WGS信息的价值,我们使用了条件估值问题,并且为了引出受访者对于降低健康问题风险以及采取降低这些风险措施的后果的偏好,我们使用了离散选择实验。我们通过考虑对评估涉及多种不确定性形式的其他复杂健康技术价值的影响来得出结论。