ArticleLaryngoscope investigative otolaryngology2023
Laryngeal cancer treatment decision making: A conjoint analysis of general public attitudes and priorities.
Article in Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Treatment Priorities in Patients With a History of Laryngeal Cancer: A Conjoint Analysis.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2026Article
- Laryngeal cancer treatment decision making: A conjoint analysis of general public attitudes and priorities.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Patients with advanced laryngeal cancer are typically presented with divergent treatment options, namely chemoradiation versus total laryngectomy. This study aims to understand general perspectives of the factors involved in this decision-making process. Methods: Surveys were constructed using specialized conjoint analysis software. Seven attributes integral to the decision-making process for advanced laryngeal cancer treatment were included. Results: Three hundred one healthy adult volunteers completed the decision-making program. The relative impact of each treatment attribute on decision making across all participants was scored with an average importance score (standard deviation) as follows: Lifespan 22.2% (±8.5), Voicing 21.4% (±5.9), Swallowing 19.1% (±7.3), Cancer Cure 14.9% (±6.2), Mode of Breathing 11.0% (±3.7), Self-Image 6.7% (±2.9), and Treatment Type 4.8% (±3.0). Conclusions: General public opinion ranked lifespan, voicing, and swallowing aspects as similarly important, and all were ranked more important than probability of cure. These data demonstrate a variety of priorities among participants and the need for tailored discussions when determining treatment choice for advanced laryngeal cancer. Level of Evidence: Level 4.
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.