• 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

使用离散选择实验推导健康筛查计划偏好的方法学:综述。

Methodology to derive preference for health screening programmes using discrete choice experiments: a scoping review.

机构信息

Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation, Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Kelvin Grove, 4059, QLD, Australia.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Aug 24;22(1):1079. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08464-7.

DOI:10.1186/s12913-022-08464-7
PMID:36002895
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9400308/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

While involving users in healthcare decision-making has become increasingly common and important, there is a lack of knowledge about how to best design community-based health screening programs. Reviews of methods that incorporate discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are scarce, particularly for non-cancer illnesses like cardiovascular disease, diabetes and liver disease. We provide an overview of currently available applications and methods available by using DCEs in health screening programs, for chronic conditions.

METHODS

A scoping review was undertaken, where four electronic databases were searched for key terms to identify eligible DCE studies related to community health screening. We included studies that met a pre-determined criteria, including being published between 2011 and 2021, in English and reported findings on human participants. Data were systematically extracted, tabulated, and summarised in a narrative review.

RESULTS

A total of 27 studies that used a DCE to elicit preferences for cancer (n = 26) and cardiovascular disease screening (n = 1) programmes were included in the final analysis. All studies were assessed for quality, against a list of 13 criteria, with the median score being 9/13 (range 5-12). Across the 27 studies, the majority (80%) had the same overall scores. Two-thirds of included studies reported a sample size calculation, approximately half (13/27) administered the survey completely online and over 75% used the general public as the participating population.

CONCLUSION

Our review has led to highlighting several areas of current practice that can be improved, particularly greater use of sample size calculations, increased use of qualitative methods, better explanation of the chosen experimental design including how choice sets are generated, and methods for analysis.

摘要

背景

虽然让用户参与医疗决策变得越来越普遍和重要,但对于如何最好地设计基于社区的健康筛查项目,人们的了解还很有限。关于纳入离散选择实验(DCE)的方法的综述很少,特别是对于心血管疾病、糖尿病和肝病等非癌症疾病。我们提供了目前可用于健康筛查计划中慢性疾病的 DCE 应用和方法的概述。

方法

进行了范围界定审查,其中四个电子数据库中搜索了关键词,以确定与社区健康筛查相关的合格 DCE 研究。我们纳入了符合预先确定标准的研究,包括发表时间在 2011 年至 2021 年之间,使用英语并报告了人类参与者的研究结果。数据以叙述性综述的形式进行系统提取、制表和总结。

结果

共有 27 项使用 DCE 来引出对癌症(n=26)和心血管疾病筛查(n=1)计划偏好的研究纳入最终分析。所有研究均根据 13 项标准进行了质量评估,中位数得分为 9/13(范围为 5-12)。在 27 项研究中,大多数(80%)的总体得分相同。三分之二的纳入研究报告了样本量计算,大约一半(13/27)完全在线进行调查,超过 75%的研究使用公众作为参与人群。

结论

我们的综述突出了当前实践中可以改进的几个方面,特别是更广泛地使用样本量计算、增加定性方法的使用、更好地解释所选择的实验设计,包括如何生成选择集,以及分析方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/32e8/9400308/8f30bc85a096/12913_2022_8464_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/32e8/9400308/8f30bc85a096/12913_2022_8464_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/32e8/9400308/8f30bc85a096/12913_2022_8464_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Methodology to derive preference for health screening programmes using discrete choice experiments: a scoping review.使用离散选择实验推导健康筛查计划偏好的方法学:综述。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Aug 24;22(1):1079. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08464-7.
2
Preferences for aspects of antenatal and newborn screening: a systematic review.产前和新生儿筛查方面的偏好:系统评价。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Apr 16;19(1):131. doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2278-7.
3
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.在流行地区,服用抗叶酸抗疟药物的人群中,叶酸补充剂与疟疾易感性和严重程度的关系。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217.
4
Attribute Development in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Methods and Techniques to Inform Quantitative Instruments.健康相关离散选择实验中的属性发展:定性方法和技术以告知定量工具的系统评价。
Value Health. 2024 Nov;27(11):1620-1633. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.05.014. Epub 2024 Jun 6.
5
Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review.系统评价中总结离散选择实验的方法:范围综述。
Patient. 2022 Nov;15(6):629-639. doi: 10.1007/s40271-022-00587-7. Epub 2022 Jul 13.
6
Risk as an attribute in discrete choice experiments: a systematic review of the literature.作为离散选择实验中一个属性的风险:文献的系统综述
Patient. 2014;7(2):151-70. doi: 10.1007/s40271-014-0048-1.
7
Methods for Conducting Stated Preference Research with Children and Adolescents in Health: A Scoping Review of the Application of Discrete Choice Experiments.健康领域中儿童和青少年选择偏好研究方法:离散选择实验应用的范围综述。
Patient. 2021 Nov;14(6):741-758. doi: 10.1007/s40271-021-00519-x. Epub 2021 May 19.
8
Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.健康经济学中的离散选择实验:文献综述
Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 Sep;32(9):883-902. doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0170-x.
9
The application of discrete choice experiments eliciting young peoples' preferences for healthcare: a systematic literature review.离散选择实验在青少年医疗偏好评估中的应用:系统文献回顾。
Eur J Health Econ. 2023 Aug;24(6):987-998. doi: 10.1007/s10198-022-01528-9. Epub 2022 Sep 28.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
Discrete Choice Experiments and Conjoint Analyses in Health Screening Programs for Type 2 Diabetes and Liver Disease: A Scoping Review.2型糖尿病和肝病健康筛查项目中的离散选择实验与联合分析:一项范围综述
Can Liver J. 2025 Feb 25;8(1):63-78. doi: 10.3138/canlivj-2024-0050. eCollection 2025 Feb.
2
Female sex worker preferences for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis delivery in Uganda: A discrete choice experiment.乌干达女性性工作者对艾滋病病毒暴露前预防服务的偏好:一项离散选择实验
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2025 Jun 24;5(6):e0003848. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003848. eCollection 2025.
3
Consumer Preferences for a Healthcare Appointment Reminder in Australia: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

本文引用的文献

1
Artificial intelligence in breast cancer screening: primary care provider preferences.乳腺癌筛查中的人工智能:初级保健提供者的偏好
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2021 Jun 12;28(6):1117-1124. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocaa292.
2
What Factors Influence Non-Participation Most in Colorectal Cancer Screening? A Discrete Choice Experiment.哪些因素对结直肠癌筛查的不参与影响最大?一项离散选择实验。
Patient. 2021 Mar;14(2):269-281. doi: 10.1007/s40271-020-00477-w. Epub 2020 Nov 5.
3
Public Preferences and Predicted Uptake for Esophageal Cancer Screening Strategies: A Labeled Discrete Choice Experiment.
澳大利亚消费者对医疗预约提醒的偏好:一项离散选择实验。
Patient. 2024 Sep;17(5):537-550. doi: 10.1007/s40271-024-00692-9. Epub 2024 Apr 11.
4
A discrete choice experiment to elicit preferences for a liver screening programme in Queensland, Australia: a mixed methods study to select attributes and levels.采用离散选择实验方法在澳大利亚昆士兰州获取人们对肝脏筛查项目的偏好:一项选择属性和水平的混合方法研究
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Sep 5;23(1):950. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09934-2.
5
Analysis of Current Situation Regarding Scientific Fitness Literacy of Nurses in Sports Medicine Integration.运动医学整合中护士科学健身素养的现状分析
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2022 Oct 1;15:1831-1841. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S378969. eCollection 2022.
公众对食管癌筛查策略的偏好和预期接受度:一项标记离散选择实验。
Clin Transl Gastroenterol. 2020 Nov;11(11):e00260. doi: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000260.
4
Global burden of 369 diseases and injuries in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.204 个国家和地区 1990-2019 年 369 种疾病和伤害导致的全球负担:2019 年全球疾病负担研究的系统分析。
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1204-1222. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30925-9.
5
Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews.范围综述实施的更新方法学指南。
JBI Evid Synth. 2020 Oct;18(10):2119-2126. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167.
6
Demand for Cancer Screening Services: Results From Randomized Controlled Discrete Choice Experiments.癌症筛查服务需求:随机对照离散选择实验结果。
Value Health. 2020 Sep;23(9):1246-1255. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.06.004. Epub 2020 Aug 15.
7
Individuals' Preferences for Esophageal Cancer Screening: A Discrete Choice Experiment.个体对食管癌筛查的偏好:一项离散选择实验。
Value Health. 2020 Aug;23(8):1087-1095. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.03.013. Epub 2020 Jul 15.
8
Social inequalities in cervical cancer screening: a discrete choice experiment among French general practitioners and gynaecologists.社会不平等与宫颈癌筛查:法国全科医生和妇科医生的离散选择实验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jul 27;20(1):693. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05479-w.
9
The effect of information on prostate cancer screening decision process: a discrete choice experiment.信息对前列腺癌筛查决策过程的影响:一项离散选择实验。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 May 26;20(1):467. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05327-x.
10
Public Attitudes on Lung Cancer Screening and Radiation Risk: A Best-Worst Experiment.公众对肺癌筛查和辐射风险的态度:最佳-最差实验。
Value Health. 2020 Apr;23(4):495-505. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.11.006. Epub 2020 Mar 28.