ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026
The elicitation of quality of life preferences for lung cancer treatment from the perspective of patients and treating physicians: results of two discrete choice experiments.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMaintaining or improving the health-related quality of life (QoL) of lung cancer patients is essential throughout treatment. To support shared decision-making and improve patient-physician communication, patients' preferences should be understood and considered in clinical decision-making; however, existing research indicates notable discrepancies between patient and physician priorities. This study therefore aims to elicit and compare their preferences regarding QoL dimensions in lung cancer care in Germany.
methodsBased on systematic literature reviews as well as qualitative analysis, two discrete choice experiments (DCEs) were applied to elicit the preferences of patients and treating physicians. In the DCE scenarios, both groups chose between alternative QoL profiles reflecting different health states during lung cancer treatment. Data were analyzed using multinomial logit models.
resultsThe final DCEs comprised five common attributes - activities of daily living, shortness of breath, anxiety, social life, and emotional impairment - and one group-specific attribute: financial difficulties in the patient DCE and severity of pain in the physician DCE. Overall, 162 patients (mean age: 60.39 years, SD 10.05) and 154 referring physicians (mean age: 51.26 years, SD 11.28) participated. All model coefficients were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Patients prioritized "Shortness of breath" (28.0%; level range of 1.417) and "Activities of daily living" (23.8%; level range of 1.207), while "Emotional impairment" (6.4%; level range of 0.323) ranked lowest. In contrast, treating physicians emphasized ''Shortness of breath" (26.0%; level range of 1.114) and "Severity of pain" (22.5%; level range of 0.962); again, "Emotional impairment" ranked lowest (4.8%; level range of 0.207).
conclusionsOverall, patients and treating physicians showed broad agreement regarding the importance of several central QoL dimensions, particularly shortness of breath and activities of daily living. At the same time, differences in the weighting of selected attributes suggest that individual QoL priorities should be addressed explicitly in patient-physician communication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42545648What 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.