Abstract
Purpose: To compare the effects of three methods of values clarification (VCM): balance sheet; rating and ranking; and a discrete choice experiment (DCE) on decision-making about colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among adults in the US and Australia. Methods: Using online panels managed by a survey research organization in the US and Australia, we recruited adults ages 50-75 at average risk for CRC for an online survey. Those eligible were randomized to one of the three VCM tasks. CRC screening options were described in terms of five key attributes: reduction in risk of CRC incidence and mortality; nature of the screening test; screening frequency; complications from screening; and chance of requiring a colonoscopy (as initial or follow-up testing). Main outcomes included self-reported most important attribute and unlabeled screening test preference by VCM and by country, assessed after the VCM. Results: A total of 920 participants were enrolled; 51 % were Australian; mean age was 59.0; 87.0 % were white; 34.2 % had a 4-year college degree; 42.8 % had household incomes less than 45,000 USD per year; 44.9 % were up to date with CRC screening. Most important attribute differed across VCM groups: the rating and ranking group was more likely to choose risk reduction as most important attribute (69.8 %) than the balance sheet group (54.7 %) or DCE (49.3 %), p < 0.0001; most important attribute did not vary by country (p = 0.236). The fecal occult blood test (FOBT)-like test was the most frequently preferred test overall (55.9 %). Unlabeled test choice did not differ meaningfully by VCM. Australians were more likely to prefer the FOBT (AU 66.2 % vs. US 45.1 %, OR 2.4, 95 % CI 1.8, 3.1). Few participants favored no screening (US: 9.2 %, AU: 6.2 %). Conclusions: Screening test attribute importance varied by VCM, but not by country. FOBT was more commonly preferred by Australians than by Americans, but test preferences were heterogeneous in both countries. © 2013 Society of General Internal Medicine.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Brenner, A., Howard, K., Lewis, C., Sheridan, S., Crutchfield, T., Hawley, S., … Pignone, M. (2014). Comparing 3 values clarification methods for colorectal cancer screening decision-making: A randomized trial in the US and Australia. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 29(3), 507–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-013-2701-0
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.