Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34515087›Full record

Trial reportDermatology (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Consumer Preference and Willingness to Pay for Direct-to-Consumer Mobile Teledermoscopy Services in Australia.

Centaine L Snoswell, Jennifer A Whitty, Liam J Caffery, Joanna Kho, Caitlin Horsham, Lois J Loescher, Dimitrios Vagenas, Nicole Gillespie, H Peter Soyer, Monika Janda

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Understanding patient priorities in teledermatology for psoriasis: A discrete choice experiment.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025
    Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Centaine L SnoswellCentre for Online Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Jennifer A WhittySchool of Pharmacy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Liam J CafferyCentre for Online Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Joanna KhoUQ Business School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Caitlin HorshamCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Lois J LoescherCollege of Nursing, Arizona Cancer Center, and Skin Cancer Institute at The University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA.
Dimitrios VagenasInstitute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Directorate, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Nicole GillespieUQ Business School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
H Peter SoyerThe University of Queensland Diamantina Institute, The University of Queensland, Dermatology Research Centre, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Monika JandaCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate consumer preference and willingness to pay for mobile teledermoscopy services in Australia.

methodsConsumers who were taking part in a randomised controlled trial comparing mobile teledermoscopy and skin self-examination were asked to complete a survey which incorporated a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a contingent valuation question. Responses were used to determine their willingness to pay for mobile teledermoscopy services in Australia and their overall service preferences.

resultsThe 199 consumers who responded were 71% female and had a mean age of 42 years (range, 18-73). The DCE results showed that consumers prefer a trained medical professional to be involved in their skin cancer screening. Consumers were willing to pay AUD 41 to change from a general practitioner reviewing their lesions in-person to having a dermatologist reviewing the teledermoscopy images. Additionally, they were willing to pay for services that had shorter waiting times, that reduced the time away from their usual activities, and that have higher accuracy and lower likelihood of unnecessary excision of a skin lesion. When asked directly about their willingness to pay for a teledermoscopy service using a contingent valuation question, the majority (73%) of consumers selected the lowest two value brackets of AUD 1-20 or AUD 21-40.

conclusionConsumers are willing to pay out of pocket to access services with attributes such as a dermatologist review, improved accuracy, and fewer excisions.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorTelemedicineAdultAustraliaDermoscopyFemaleHumansMaleSelf-ExaminationCancerChoice experimentDermoscopyMelanomaQuestionnaireTeledermoscopy

Identifiers

PMID34515087
PMCPMC8985042

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.