The influence of information and private versus public provision on preferences for screening for prostate cancer: A willingness-to-pay study

Health Policy

Volumn 101, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 277-289

  Pedersen, Line Bjørnskov ^a   Gyrd Hansen, Dorte ^a,b   Kjær, Trine ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation method; Denmark; Information; Prostate cancer screening; Public private provision; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER SCREENING; CONTROLLED STUDY; EMPLOYMENT; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; INCOME; MALE; MEDICAL FEE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE; PROSTATE CANCER; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUESTIONNAIRE;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; DENMARK; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PROSTATE-SPECIFIC ANTIGEN; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 79960114804     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: 18726054     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.05.008     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Burford D, Kirby M, Austoker J. Prostata cancer: Information til praktiserende læger. PSA test af asymptomatiske mænd (Prostate cancer: Information to general practitioners. PSA test of asymptomatic men). Cancer i praksis (cancer in practice). Region Midtjylland; 2009.
2. Andriole G.L., Crawford E.D., Grubb R.L., Buys S.S., Chia D., Church T.R., et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. New England Journal of Medicine 2009, 360(13):1310.
3. Borre M, Iversen P. Screening for prostatacancer-hvad siger evidensen? (Screening for prostate cancer-what does the evidence say?), 20 ed. Danish Medical Bulletin; 2007.
4. Holmstrom B., Johansson M., Bergh A., Stenman U.H., Hallmans G., Stattin P. Prostate specific antigen for early detection of prostate cancer: longitudinal study. British Medical Journal 2009, 339(September (1)):b3537.
5. Schroder F.H., Hugosson J., Roobol M.J., Tammela T.L.J., Ciatto S., Nelen V., et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. New England Journal of Medicine 2009, 360(13):1320.
6. Bangma C.H., Roemeling S., Schroder F.H. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of early detected prostate cancer. World Journal of Urology 2007, 25(March (1)):3-9.
7. Etzioni R., Tsodikov A., Mariotto A., Szabo A., Falcon S., Wegelin J., et al. Quantifying the role of PSA screening in the US prostate cancer mortality decline. Cancer Causes Control 2008, 19(March (2)):175-181.
8. Linn M.M., Ball R.A., Maradiegue A. Prostate-specific antigen screening: friend or foe?. Urologic Nursing 2007, 27(December (6)):481-489.
9. Postma R., Schroder F.H. Screening for prostate cancer. European Journal of Cancer 2005, 41(April (6)):825-833.
10. Danish Urological Society. Prostatabetænkning 2005 (Prostate Cancer Recommendation); 2005.
11. Tversky A., Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 1981, 211(January (4481)):453-458.
12. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business 1986, 59(4 pt. 2):251-278.
13. Arrow K, Solow R, Portney P, Leamer E, Radner R, Shuman H. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation; 1993.
14. Fischer A., Hanley N. Analysing decision behaviour in stated preference surveys: a consumer psychological approach. Ecological Economics 2007, 61:303-314.
15. O'Conor R., Johannesson M., Johansson P. Stated preferences, real behaviour, and anchoring: some empirical evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics 1999, 13:235-248.
16. Olsen J., Kidholm K., Donaldson C., Shackley P. Willingness to pay for public health care: a comparison of two approaches. Health Policy 2004, 70:217-228.
17. Rolfe J., Bennett J. The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation 2001, Edward Elgar Publishing.
18. Fautrel B., Clarke A., Guillemin F., Adam V., St-Pierre Y., Panaritis T., et al. Valuing a hypothetical cure for rheumatoid arthritis using the contingent valuation methodology: the patient perspective. Journal of Rheumatology 2005, 32(3):443-453.
19. Andersson H., Lindberg G. Benevolence and the value of road safety. Accident Analysis & Prevention 2009, 41(2):286-293.
20. Hultkrantz L., Lindberg G., Andersson C. The value of improved road safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 2006, 32(2):151-170.
21. Johannesson M., Johansson P.O., O'Conor R.M. The value of private safety versus the value of public safety. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1996, 13(3):263-275.
22. Svensson M., Vredin Johansson M. Willingness to pay for private and public road safety in stated preference studies: why the difference?. Accident Analysis & Prevention 2010, 42(4):1205-1212.
23. Yasunaga H., Ide H., Imamura T., Ohe K. Benefit evaluation of mass screening for prostate cancer: willingness-to-pay measurement using contingent valuation. Urology 2006, 68(November (5)):1046-1050.
24. Yasunaga H., Ide H., Imamura T., Ohe K. The measurement of willingness to pay for mass cancer screening with whole-body PET (positron emission tomography). Annals of Nuclear Medicine 2006, 20(August (7)):457-462.
25. Yasunaga H. Willingness to pay for mass screening for prostate cancer: a contingent valuation survey. International Journal of Urology 2008, 15(January (1)):102-105.
26. Evans R., Elwyn G., Edwards A., Newcombe R., Kinnersley P., Wright P., et al. A randomised controlled trial of the effects of a web-based PSA decision aid, Prosdex. Protocol. BMC Family Practice 2007, 8:58.
27. Watson E., Hewitson P., Brett J., Bukach C., Evans R., Edwards A., et al. Informed decision making and prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing for prostate cancer: a randomised controlled trial exploring the impact of a brief patient decision aid on men's knowledge, attitudes and intention to be tested. Patient Education and Counseling 2006, 63(November (3)):367-379.
28. Domenighetti G., Grilli R., Maggi J.R. Does provision of an evidence-based information change public willingness to accept screening tests?. Health Expectations 2000, 3(June (2)):145-150.
29. Fonta W., Ichoku H., Kabobu-Mariara J. The effect of protest zeros on estimates of willingness to pay in health care contingent valuation analysis. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2010, 8(4):225-237.
30. Lang H. Willingness to pay for lung cancer treatment. Value in Health 2010, 13(6):743-749.
31. Søgaard J. Brugerbetaling i sundhedsvæsenet (User fees in the health care system). Danish Institute for Health Services Research; 2001 [Report No.: 7].
32. The Danish Parliament. § 20 spørgsmål: Om egenbetaling og brugerbetaling (§ 20 question: About user fees and self payment); 2007.
33. Bhatia M. From evidence to calibration for starting point bias: willingness to pay for treated mosquito nets in Gujarat, India. Applied Economics 2005, 37(1):1-7.
34. Norinder A., Hjalte K., Persson U. Scope and scale insensitivities in a contingent valuation study of risk reductions. Health Policy 2001, 57(August (2)):141-153.
35. Wagner T.H., Hu T., Duenas G.V., Kaplan C.P., Nguyen B.H., Pasick R.J. Does willingness to pay vary by race/ethnicity? An analysis using mammography among low-income women. Health Policy 2001, 58(December (3)):275-288.
36. Bateman I., Carson R., Day B., Hanemann M., Hanley N., Hett T., et al. Economic valuation with stated preferences techniques: a manual 2002, Edward Elgar Publishing.
37. Smith R.D. It's not just what you do, it's the way that you do it: the effect of different payment card formats and survey administration on willingness to pay for health gain. Health Economics 2006, 15(March (3)):281-293.
38. Internetadgang i hjemmet (Internet access at home). Statistics Denmark. February 15, 2011. http://www.statistikbanken.dk/BEBRIT01.
39. Johannesson M., Blomquist G.C., Blumenschein K., Johansson P., Liljas B., O'Coner R.M. Calibrating hypothetical willingness to pay responses. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1999, 18:21-32.
40. FU7: The economic of households by extended group of households and economic dimensions. Statistics Denmark. http://www.statistikbanken.dk/statbank5a/SelectVarVal/Define.asp?Maintable=FU7&PLanguage=1, February 15, 2011. http://www.dst.dk/.,http://www.statistikbanken.dk/statbank5a/SelectVarVal/Define.asp?Maintable=FU7&PLanguage=1
41. Drummond M., Sculpher M., Torrance G., O'Brien B., Stoddart G. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes 2005, Oxford University Press. 3 ed.
42. Pedersen K, Wittrup-Jensen K, Brooks R, Gudex C. Værdisætning af sundhed. Teorien om kvalitetsjusterede leveår og en dansk anvendelse (Valuation of health. The theory of quality adjusted life years and a Danish application). Syddansk Universitetsforlag; 2006.
43. Donaldson C., Shackley P. Does "process utility" exist? A case study of willingness to pay for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Social Science and Medicine 1997, 44(5):699-707.
44. Gyrd-Hansen D., Søgaard J. Analysing public preferences for cancer screening programmes. Health Economics 2001, 10(October (7)):617-634.
45. Jonas D., Russell L., Chou J., Pignone M. Willingness-to-pay to avoid the time spent and discomfort associated with screening colonoscopy. Health Economics 2010, 19(10):1193-1211.
46. Protiére C., Donaldson C., Luchini S., Moatti J., Shackley P. The impact of information on non-health attributes on willingness to pay for multiple health care programmes. Social Science and Medicine 2004, 58:1257-1269.
47. Bell D. Explaining utility theory paradoxes by decision regret. Proceedings of the fourth international conference on multiple criteria decision making 1981, 28-39. Springer, New York. J. Morse (Ed.).
48. Bish A., Sutton S., Golombok S. Predicting uptake of routine cervical smear test: a comparison of the health belief model and the theory of planned behaviour. Psychology and Health 2000, 15:35-50.
49. Loomes G, Sugden R. Regret theory: an alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. The Economic Journal 1982, 92:805-824.
50. Jones-Lee M., Hammerton M., Philips P. The value of safety: results of a national sample survey. The Economic Journal 1985, 95:49-72.
51. Revesz R. Environmental regulation, cost benefit analysis and the discounting of human lives, Columbia. Law Review 1999, 99(4):941-1017.
52. Sunstein C. Bad deaths. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1997, 14:259-282.
53. Vicusi W., Aldy J. The value of a statistical life: a critical review of market estimates throughout the world. The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 2003, 27(1):5-76.
54. Alder M. Fear assessment: cost benefit analysis and the pricing of fear and anxiety. Chicago-Kent Law Review 2004, 79:977-1053.
55. Araña J., León C. Willingness to pay for helth risk reduction in the context of altruism. Health Economics 2002, 11:623-635.
56. Johansson-Stenman O. Mad cows, terrorism and junk food: should public policy reflect subjective or objective risks?. Journal of Health Economics 2008, 27(2):234-248.
57. Cooper J., Loomis J. Sensitivity of willingness-to-pay estimates to bid design in dichotomous choice contingent valuation models. Land Economics 1992, 68(2):211-224.