Eliciting women's preferences for a training program in breast self-examination: A conjoint ranking experiment

Value in Health

Volumn 8, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 479-487

  Bech, Mickael ^a   Sørensen, Jan ^a   Lauridsen, Jørgen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Breast self examination; Conjoint ranking; Patient preferences; Preference elicitation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST EXAMINATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL RECORD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TRAINING; BREAST SELF EXAMINATION; CASE CONTROL STUDY; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DENMARK; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; REPRODUCIBILITY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BREAST SELF-EXAMINATION; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DENMARK; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 24944438372     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.00039.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Clarke VA, Savage SA. Breast self-examination training: a brief review. Cancer Nurs 1999;22:320-6.
2. Grady KE. The efficacy of breast self-examination. J Gerontol 1992;47:69-74.
3. Gastrin G. Preliminary-results of primary screening for breast-cancer with the mama program. Soz Praventivmed 1993;38:280-7.
4. Harvey BJ, Miller AB, Baines CJ, Corey PN. Effect of breast self-examination techniques on the risk of death from breast cancer. Can Med Assoc J 1997;157:1205-12.
5. Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. Canadian national breast screening study-2: 13-year results of a randomized trial in women aged 50-59 years. J Nat Cancer Inst 2000;92:1490-9.
6. Moss SM, Coleman DA, Chamberlain J, et al. 16-year mortality from breast cancer in the UK trial of early detection of breast cancer. Lancet 1999; 353:1909-14.
7. Semiglazov VF, Sagaidak VN, Moiseyenko VM, Mikhailov EA. Study of the role of breast self-examination in the reduction of mortality from breast-cancer. Euro J Cancer 1993;29A:2039-46.
8. Thomas DB, Gao DL, Ray RM, et al. Randomized trial of breast self-examination in Shanghai: final results. J Nat Cancer Inst 2002;94:1445-57.
9. Baxter N. Preventive health care, 2001 update: should women be routinely taught breast self-examination to screen for breast cancer? Can Med Assoc J 2001;164:1837-46.
10. Josefson D. Breast self examination does not improve cancer survival. BMJ 2002;325:793.
11. Epstein RJ. Breast self examination-breast self examination provides entry strategy. BMJ 2003; 326:710-1.
12. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BKS, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening, a summary of the evidence for the US preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:347-60.
13. Austoker J. Breast self examination-does not prevent deaths due to breast cancer, but breast awareness is still important. BMJ 2003;326:1-2.
14. Baines CJ. Breast self-examination. Cancer 1992;69:1942-6.
15. Rosvold EO, Hjartaker A, Bjertness E, Lund E. Breast self-examination and cervical cancer testing among norwegian female physicians - a nationwide comparative study. Soc Sci Med 2001;52: 249-58.
16. Asmussen M, Hertz A. Sørense J. Evaluering Af Undervisning I Brystselvundersøgelse I Ribe Amt [Report in Danish: "Evaluation of Breast Self-Examination Teaching in Ribe County"]. Odense: Centre for Applied Health Services Research and Technology Assessment, 2002.
17. Pinto BM. Training and maintenance of breast self-examination skills. Am J Prev Med 1993;9:353-8.
18. Assaf AR, Cummings KM, Graham S, et al. Comparison of three methods of teaching women how to perform breast self-examination. Health Educ 1985;12:259-72.
19. Alcoe SY, Gilbey VJ, McDermot RS, Wallace DG. The practise of breast self-examination over a six-year period following teaching. Patient Educ Couns 1995;25:183-96.
20. Farrar S, Ryan M, Ross D, Ludbrook A. Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. Soc Sci Med 2000;50:63-75.
21. Gyrd-Hansen D. Cost-benefit analysis of mammography screening in Denmark based on discrete ranking data. Inter J Technol Assess Health Care 2000;16:811-21.
22. Gyrd-Hansen D, Sogaard J. Analysing public references for cancer screening programmes. Health Econ 2001;10:617-34.
23. Ryan M. Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation. Soc Sci Med 1999;48:535-46.
24. Slothuus U, Larsen ML, Junker P. The contingent ranking method - a feasible and valid method when eliciting preferences for health care? Soc Sci Med 2002;54:1601-9.
25. Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, et al. Economic Evaluation with Stated Preference Techniques, a Manual. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2002.
26. Hanley N, Mourato S, Wright RE. Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation? J Econ Surv 2001;15: 435-62.
27. McFadden D. Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behavior. In: Zarembka P. Frontiers in Econometrics. New York: Academic Press, 1974.
28. Long JS. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. London: Sage, 1997.
29. Statacorp. Reference Manual V8. College Station: Stata Corporation, 2002.
30. Kristrom B. A nonparametric approach to the estimation of welfare measures in discrete response valuation studies. Land Econ 1990;66:135-9.
31. Cooper JC. A comparison of approaches to calculating confidence-intervals for benefit measures from dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. Land Econ 1994;70:111-22.
32. Hanemann WM, Kanninen B. The Statistical Analysis of Discrete-Response CV DATA. Berkeley: Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Policy, University of California at Berkeley, 1998. Report No.: Working Paper.
33. Krinsky I, Robb AL. On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev Econ Stat 1986;68:715-9.
34. Cameron TA, James MD. Efficient estimation methods for closed-ended contingent valuation surveys. Rev Econ Stat 1987;69:269-76.
35. Greene William H. Econometric Analysis (5th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 2003.
36. Foster V, Mourato S. Testing for consistency in contingent ranking experiments. J Environ Econ Manag 2002;44:309-28.
37. Ben-Akiva M, Morikawa T, Shiroishi F. Analysis of the reliability of preference ranking data. J Bus Res 1992;24:149-64.
38. Feather N. The measurement of values: effects of different assessment procedures. Aus J Psych 1973;25:221-31.
39. Ryan M, San Miguel F. Testing for consistency in willingness to pay experiments. J Econ Psych 2000;21:305-17.