Preferences of Cancer Survivors for Follow-Up Care: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.

IF 3.4 3区医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1007/s40271-024-00722-6

Tongyu Zhang, Zhuobing Bai, Bingyan Zhao, Yu Chen, Chunmei Zhang

{"title":"Preferences of Cancer Survivors for Follow-Up Care: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.","authors":"Tongyu Zhang, Zhuobing Bai, Bingyan Zhao, Yu Chen, Chunmei Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s40271-024-00722-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and objective: Cancer survivors frequently encounter multiple challenges, including physical, psychological, social, emotional, and financial difficulties. These challenges significantly impact their quality of life and recovery process. This systematic review intends to delineate and assess the evidence gathered from discrete choice experiments, aiming to unravel the preferences of cancer survivors towards their follow-up care.Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CNKI, Wanfang, and SinoMed databases up to July 2024. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal of the studies. The collected data were synthesized through a narrative approach. Additionally, semi-quantitative analyses were used to evaluate the frequency, importance, and significance of each attribute.Results: Eight studies conducted across four countries were analyzed, yielding 41 distinct attributes grouped into eight main categories and 14 subcategories, further refined by subject matter. Despite the differences in payment systems between countries, the type of provider topped the list of preferences for cancer survivors' follow-up care. Next in preference was the contact modality. Service quality (comprehensive plans, personalized service, detailed information) was also valued. However, opinions diverged on continuity, additional support, and service frequency.Conclusions: The attributes of follow-up care preferences integrated in this review demonstrate a diverse range among cancer survivors. Generally, they prioritize skilled professionals, flexible contact modality, and other high-quality follow-up care elements. Future studies should analyze cancer survivors' preferences for follow-up care from the perspectives of different stakeholders, and further consider internal and external factors to ensure authentic decision making.","PeriodicalId":51271,"journal":{"name":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-024-00722-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective: Cancer survivors frequently encounter multiple challenges, including physical, psychological, social, emotional, and financial difficulties. These challenges significantly impact their quality of life and recovery process. This systematic review intends to delineate and assess the evidence gathered from discrete choice experiments, aiming to unravel the preferences of cancer survivors towards their follow-up care.

Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted across PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CNKI, Wanfang, and SinoMed databases up to July 2024. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal of the studies. The collected data were synthesized through a narrative approach. Additionally, semi-quantitative analyses were used to evaluate the frequency, importance, and significance of each attribute.

Results: Eight studies conducted across four countries were analyzed, yielding 41 distinct attributes grouped into eight main categories and 14 subcategories, further refined by subject matter. Despite the differences in payment systems between countries, the type of provider topped the list of preferences for cancer survivors' follow-up care. Next in preference was the contact modality. Service quality (comprehensive plans, personalized service, detailed information) was also valued. However, opinions diverged on continuity, additional support, and service frequency.

Conclusions: The attributes of follow-up care preferences integrated in this review demonstrate a diverse range among cancer survivors. Generally, they prioritize skilled professionals, flexible contact modality, and other high-quality follow-up care elements. Future studies should analyze cancer survivors' preferences for follow-up care from the perspectives of different stakeholders, and further consider internal and external factors to ensure authentic decision making.

查看原文本刊更多论文

癌症幸存者对后续护理的偏好：离散选择实验的系统回顾》。

背景和目的：癌症幸存者经常会遇到多种挑战，包括生理、心理、社交、情感和经济困难。这些挑战严重影响了他们的生活质量和康复进程。本系统性综述旨在界定和评估从离散选择实验中收集到的证据，旨在揭示癌症幸存者对后续护理的偏好：对截至 2024 年 7 月的 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO、CNKI、万方和 SinoMed 数据库进行了系统性文献综述。两名审稿人独立完成了研究的筛选、数据提取和质量评估。收集到的数据通过叙事方法进行综合。此外，还使用半定量分析来评估每个属性的频率、重要性和意义：对四个国家的八项研究进行了分析，得出 41 个不同的属性，分为八个大类和 14 个小类，并根据主题进一步细化。尽管各国的支付系统存在差异，但在癌症幸存者的后续治疗中，医疗服务提供者的类型仍是首选。其次是联系方式。服务质量（全面计划、个性化服务、详细信息）也很受重视。然而，在持续性、额外支持和服务频率方面，意见却不一致：本综述所整合的随访护理偏好属性显示了癌症幸存者的多样性。一般来说，他们优先考虑技术熟练的专业人员、灵活的联系模式以及其他高质量的后续护理要素。未来的研究应从不同利益相关者的角度分析癌症幸存者对后续护理的偏好，并进一步考虑内部和外部因素，以确保决策的真实性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-

CiteScore

6.60

自引率

8.30%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Patient provides a venue for scientifically rigorous, timely, and relevant research to promote the development, evaluation and implementation of therapies, technologies, and innovations that will enhance the patient experience. It is an international forum for research that advances and/or applies qualitative or quantitative methods to promote the generation, synthesis, or interpretation of evidence. The journal has specific interest in receiving original research, reviews and commentaries related to qualitative and mixed methods research, stated-preference methods, patient reported outcomes, and shared decision making. Advances in regulatory science, patient-focused drug development, patient-centered benefit-risk and health technology assessment will also be considered. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in The Patient may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances. All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.