Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34885217›Full record

ArticleCancers2021

Preferred Lung Cancer Screening Modalities in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Zixuan Zhao, Lingbin Du, Le Wang, Youqing Wang, Yi Yang, Hengjin Dong

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zixuan ZhaoCenter for Health Policy Studies, School of Public Health, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310058, China.ORCID 0000-0002-1254-1504
Lingbin DuDepartment of Cancer Prevention, Institute of Cancer and Basic Medicine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Cancer Hospital of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Zhejiang Cancer Hospital), Hangzhou 310022, China.
Le WangDepartment of Cancer Prevention, Institute of Cancer and Basic Medicine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Cancer Hospital of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Zhejiang Cancer Hospital), Hangzhou 310022, China.
Youqing WangDepartment of Cancer Prevention, Institute of Cancer and Basic Medicine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Cancer Hospital of the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (Zhejiang Cancer Hospital), Hangzhou 310022, China.
Yi YangCenter for Health Policy Studies, School of Public Health, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310058, China.
Hengjin DongCenter for Health Policy Studies, School of Public Health, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310058, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5064-7297
Zhejiang Cancer Hospital · CNZhejiang University · CN

Funding

Science and Technology Service Network Initiative of Chinese Academy of Sciences No.KFJ-STS-QYZD-2021-08-001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to identify preferred lung cancer screening modalities in a Chinese population and predict uptake rates of different modalities. A discrete choice experiment questionnaire was administered to 392 Chinese individuals aged 50-74 years who were at high risk for lung cancer. Each choice set had two lung screening options and an option to opt-out, and respondents were asked to choose the most preferred one. Both mixed logit analysis and stepwise logistic analysis were conducted to explore whether preferences were related to respondent characteristics and identify which kinds of respondents were more likely to opt out of any screening. On mixed logit analysis, attributes that were predictive of choice at 1% level of statistical significance included the screening interval, screening venue, and out-of-pocket costs. The preferred screening modality seemed to be screening by low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) + blood test once a year in a general hospital at a cost of RMB 50; this could increase the uptake rate by 0.40 compared to the baseline setting. On stepwise logistic regression, those with no endowment insurance were more likely to opt out; those who were older and housewives/househusbands, and those with a health check habit and with commercial endowment insurance were less likely to opt out from a screening programme. There was considerable variance between real risk and self-perceived risk of lung cancer among respondents. Lung cancer screening uptake can be increased by offering various screening modalities, so as to help policymakers further design the screening modality.

Indexed as

Chinadiscrete choice experimentlung cancerscreening modality

Identifiers

PMID34885217
PMCPMC8656503
OpenAlexW4200520154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.