ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2023
Informing decision makers about public preferences for different modalities of cancer treatment in the Rhône-Alps region in France.
Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlternative options to hospital care like home care or local health centers (LHCs) are being advocated. However, no study has measured citizens' preferences (who will finance these services via taxation) for these options.
objectivesWe measured (i) citizens' preferences for these services, that is, respondents stated where they would like to get the treatment; (ii) the strength of their preference.
methodsA computerized survey composed of (i) a decision aid to inform respondents about the three options; (ii) three scenarios, from light-to-heavy care, that respondents should rank from the most to the least preferred option of care. (iii) a contingent valuation survey (CVS) to assess how much respondents were willing to pay for their preferred option (except for hospital care if chosen, because it is the default option and free). (iv) a socio-demographic questionnaire.
resultsData were collected from a representative sample of citizens living in the Rhône-Alps Region (
conclusionIn France, for cancer, not all citizens would prefer to be treated at home rather than in a hospital. Only less than a quarter would prefer LHC. These results show the mismatch between public health policies and the citizens' preferences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.