ArticleThe patient2023
Patient Preferences for Multi-Cancer Early Detection (MCED) Screening Tests.
Article in The patient, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Public Preferences for Emerging Cancer Screening Modalities: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- The Cost Effectiveness of Genomic Medicine in Cancer Control: A Systematic Literature Review.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- Non-invasive screening in hereditary cancer: a randomized controlled trial to test cell-free DNA-based early detection in the CHARM consortium.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Trial
- Multi-cancer early detection tests: national estimates of awareness and perceived value in the United States.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- A Socio-ecological Analysis of Factors Influencing the Perceived Value of Multicancer Early Detection Testing in the United States.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026Article
- Patient, community, and clinician beliefs about multi-cancer detection tests: implications for the evidence needed to recommend routine use.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Impact of Population Cancer Risk on the Cost-effectiveness of Multicancer Early Detection Testing in the United States.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- Willingness of adults in the United States to have a multicancer detection test.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025Article
- Preferences for multi-cancer tests (MCTs) in primary care: discrete choice experiments of general practitioners and the general public in England.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Projecting individualized probabilities of lifetime all-cancer risk.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Elderly People's Preferences for Different Organizational Models for Frailty Screening: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2025Article
- Multicancer early detection testing: Guidance for primary care discussions with patients.Cancer · 2025Review
- Transforming cancer screening: the potential of multi-cancer early detection (MCED) technologies.International journal of clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Multi-Cancer Early Detection Tests: State of the Art and Implications for Radiologists.Radiology · 2025Review
- Perceptions of Multicancer Detection Tests Among Primary Care Physicians and Laypersons: A Qualitative Study.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Patient preferences for intervention in the setting of precursor multiple myeloma.Blood cancer journal · 2024Article
- Making Use of Technology to Improve Stated Preference Studies.The patient · 2024Review
- Perceptions of multi-cancer early detection tests among communities facing barriers to health care.Health affairs scholar · 2024Article
- Innovations in Early Lung Cancer Detection: Tracing the Evolution and Advancements in Screening.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmerging blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests can detect a variety of cancer types across stages with a range of sensitivity, specificity, and ability to predict the origin of the cancer signal. However, little is known about the general US population's preferences for MCED tests.
objectiveTo quantify preferences for MCED tests among US adults aged 50-80 years using a discrete choice experiment (DCE).
methodsTo quantify preferences for attributes of blood-based MCED tests, an online DCE was conducted with five attributes (true positives, false negatives, false positives, likelihood of the cancer type unknown, number of cancer types detected), among the US population aged 50-80 years recruited via online panels and social media. Data were analyzed using latent class multinomial logit models and relative attribute importance was obtained.
resultsParticipants (N = 1700) were 54% female, mean age 63.3 years. Latent class modeling identified three classes with distinct preferences for MCED tests. The rank order of attribute importance based on relative attribute importance varied by latent class, but across all latent classes, participants preferred higher accuracy (fewer false negatives and false positives, more true positives) and screenings that detected more cancer types and had a lower likelihood of cancer type unknown. Overall, 72% of participants preferred to receive an MCED test in addition to currently recommended cancer screenings.
conclusionsWhile there is significant heterogeneity in cancer screening preferences, the majority of participants preferred MCED screening and the accuracy of these tests is important. While the majority of participants preferred adding an MCED test to complement current cancer screenings, the latent class analyses identified a small (16%) and specific subset of individuals who value attributes differently, with particular concern regarding false-negative and false-positive test results, who are significantly less likely to opt-in.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35844011What 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.