Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29385590›Full record

ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2018

Effect of co-payment on behavioral response to consumer genomic testing.

Wendy Liu, Jessica J Outlaw, Nathan Wineinger, Debra Boeldt, Cinnamon S Bloss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Genomic health data generation in the UK: a 360 view.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Wendy LiuRady School of Management, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Jessica J OutlawRady School of Management, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Nathan WineingerScripps Translational Science Institute, Scripps Genomic Medicine, Scripps Health, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Debra BoeldtScripps Translational Science Institute, Scripps Genomic Medicine, Scripps Health, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Cinnamon S BlossDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.

Funding

Scripps Translational Science InstituteUL1TR001114 · NCATS · SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, THE · PI TOPOL, ERIC JEFFREY · 2013 to 2017
$24.0M
SCRIPPS TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE INSTITUTE (UL1)UL1RR025774 · NCRR · SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, THE · PI TOPOL, ERIC JEFFREY · 2008 to 2011
$16.3M
Scripps Translational Science Institute (UL1)UL1TR000109 · NCATS · SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, THE · PI TOPOL, ERIC JEFFREY · 2012 to 2013
$4.0M
Impact of Privacy Environments for Personal Health Data on PatientsR01HG008753 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI BLOSS, CINNAMON S · 2015 to 2017
$2.0M
Response to Testing Among Individual Consumers of DTC Personal Genomics ServicesR21HG005747 · NHGRI · SCRIPPS HEALTH · PI BLOSS, CINNAMON S · 2010 to 2011
$250k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000109NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001114NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR025774NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG008753NHGRI NIH HHS R21 HG005747
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Existing research in consumer behavior suggests that perceptions and usage of a product post-purchase depends, in part, on how the product was marketed, including price paid. In the current study, we examine the effect of providing an out-of-pocket co-payment for consumer genomic testing (CGT) on consumer post-purchase behavior using both correlational field evidence and a hypothetical online experiment. Participants were enrolled in a longitudinal cohort study of the impact of CGT and completed behavioral assessments before and after receipt of CGT results. Most participants provided a co-payment for the test (N = 1668), while others (N = 369) received fully subsidized testing. The two groups were compared regarding changes in health behaviors and post-test use of health care resources. Participants who paid were more likely to share results with their physician (p = .012) and obtain follow-up health screenings (p = .005) relative to those who received fully subsidized testing. A follow-up online experiment in which participants (N = 303) were randomized to a "fully-subsidized" versus "co-payment" condition found that simulating provision of a co-payment significantly increased intentions to seek follow-up screening tests (p = .050) and perceptions of the test results as more trustworthy (p = .02). Provision of an out-of-pocket co-payment for CGT may influence consumer's post-purchase behavior consistent with a price placebo effect. Cognitive dissonance or sunk cost may help explain the increase in screening propensity among paying consumers. Such individuals may obtain follow-up screenings to validate their initial decision to expend personal resources to obtain CGT.

Indexed as

Deductibles and CoinsuranceHealth BehaviorFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGenetic TestingHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareDirect-to-consumer geneticsGenomicsHealth economicsPatient decision-makingPrecision medicinePrice placebo effect

Identifiers

PMID29385590
PMCPMC6065536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.