ArticleScientific reports2025
Analysis of urban residents' willingness to pay for packaging cancer screening and its influencing factors: a cross-sectional study in Sichuan, China.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
Packaging cancer screening (PCS) offers a cost-effective approach to detecting multiple cancers simultaneously, optimizing resource use and expanding coverage in resource-limited settings. This study investigates urban Chinese residents' willingness to pay (WTP) for PCS and its determinants to guide policy on cancer screening expansion. Data were collected from urban residents aged 40-74 in China using face-to-face questionnaires. Univariate analysis of willingness to pay for PCS was performed using the chi-square test. A logit regression model was used to conduct the multivariate analysis. Of the 3268 survey respondents included in the analysis, 75.98% were willing to undergo annual screening when the cost of PCS was completely free, and only 22.37% were willing to do so in the case of out-of-pocket payments for the screening. A total of 56.90% of the respondents were willing to pay a portion of the PCS cost. The median WTP was CNY 500, and the mean WTP ranged from CNY 493.15 to 761.96, accounting for 16.44 to 25.40% of the total screening cost. Moreover, WTP was associated with age (50 ~ < 60 years old, OR = 0.762, 95% CI 0.598-0.972; 60 ~ < 70 years old, OR = 0.588, 95% CI 0.454-0.762; and ≥ 70 years old, OR = 0.519, 95% CI 0.364-0.742), education level (junior high school, OR = 1.398, 95% CI 1.168-1.647; high school/technical secondary school/technical school, OR = 1.353, 95% CI 1.064-1.721; university and above, OR = 1.798, 95% CI 1.257-2.571), annual family income (OR = 1.652, 95% CI 1.406-1.942), self-rated health status (fair, OR = 0.759, 95% CI 0.645-0.892; poor, OR = 0.678, 95% CI 0.523-0.879), and region (Shuangliu district, OR = 0.421, 95% CI 0.338-0.525; Zilujing district, OR = 0.196, 95% CI 0.162-0.237). Screening cost significantly influences PCS participation frequency among urban Chinese residents. Free screening increases willingness for annual screening, whereas out-of-pocket payments reduce participation. Over half of residents are willing to contribute partially, covering about 25% of costs. Public awareness campaigns and multi-source financing (government, society, insurance) are recommended to reduce economic barriers and expand screening coverage.
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.