ArticleIranian journal of public health2017
A Comparative Study on Willingness to Pay for Breast Cancer and Osteoporosis Screening in Kerman, Southeastern Iran.
Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of urban residents' willingness to pay for packaging cancer screening and its influencing factors: a cross-sectional study in Sichuan, China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Willingness to pay for an mRNA-based anti-cancer treatment: results from a contingent valuation study in Israel.Israel journal of health policy research · 2024Article
- Willingness and ability to pay for breast cancer treatment among patients from Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Patient Preferences in Diagnostic Imaging: A Scoping Review.The patient · 2023Article
- Knowledge, Practice, Preferences and Willingness-to-Pay for Mammographic Screening Tests among Iranian Women: A Contingent Valuation Method.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne of the economic evaluation techniques involves calculation of willingness to pay (WTP) for a service to find out the value of that service from the clients' perspective. This study estimated WTP for both breast cancer and osteoporosis screening and comparatively examined the contributing factors. In fact, the comparisons served to provide an exact analysis of individual attitudes and behaviors in relation to screening programs for cancers and other diseases.
methodsThis study was first designed in six scenarios several questionnaires concerning individual breast cancer and osteoporosis screening cases, and determined the WTP median in each scenario between people in Kerman Province of Iran in 2016. Then, the demand function for breast cancer and osteoporosis screening was formulated. Moreover, the factors contributing to WTP were examined through various scenarios in Stata and econometric techniques.
resultsThe median and mean values of WTP in all the above scenarios were greater for breast cancer screening than for osteoporosis screening. Theoretically, the price assumed a minus sign whereas risk assumed a plus sign within the demand function formulated for both screening programs. Regarding the evaluated factors, age in breast cancer screening and risk of disease in osteoporosis screening were the major factors contributing to WTP.
conclusionBreast cancer screening was more valuable than osteoporosis screening program from the perspective of the subjects. The programs can be successfully designed by concentrating on patients' age groups in breast cancer screening and high-risk patients in osteoporosis screening.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28560201PMC5442283W2613687577What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.