诊断之外:利用偶然价值评估全基因组测序对罕见疾病诊断的价值。

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Michael Abbott, Mandy Ryan, Rodolfo Hernández, Sebastian Heidenreich, Zosia Miedzybrodzka
{"title":"诊断之外:利用偶然价值评估全基因组测序对罕见疾病诊断的价值。","authors":"Michael Abbott,&nbsp;Mandy Ryan,&nbsp;Rodolfo Hernández,&nbsp;Sebastian Heidenreich,&nbsp;Zosia Miedzybrodzka","doi":"10.1007/s40258-025-00948-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Objective</h3><p>The utility of genome-wide sequencing is often quantified in terms of its diagnostic yield. Although obtaining a diagnosis is a fundamental aspect of value, service users also value broader clinical, informational, process and psychological factors in the provision of genomic testing. This study aims to value genome-wide sequencing from the user perspective in Scotland.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>A survey was developed and administered to 1014 patients and families with experience of genome-wide sequencing to diagnose a rare condition in Scotland. Participants’ willingness to pay for genomic testing was elicited using a contingent valuation payment card. The survey included two genomic-related patient-reported outcome measures: (i) the Personal Utility Scale (PrU) to generate scores for the personal utility of genome-wide sequencing; and (ii) a subscale of the Feelings About Genomic Testing Results (FACTOR) questionnaire to measure negative psychological outcomes. Data were also collected on participants’ prior experiences of genomic testing services. A double-hurdle regression model investigated the predictors of patients' willingness to pay for genomic testing.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 1014 invitations sent, 171 contingent valuation questionnaires were returned. Diagnosed participants reported higher personal utility on PrU than undiagnosed participants. However, both groups reported similar negative psychological outcomes on FACTOR. Diagnosed participants were willing to pay £2043 for genome-wide sequencing, compared with £835 for undiagnosed participants. Diagnostic status, waiting time for results and FACTOR scores (negative psychological outcomes) influenced users’ valuations of genome-wide sequencing.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Obtaining a diagnosis is a fundamental component of utility in the provision of genomic testing. However, there is still value to those who do not receive a diagnosis. These results have implications for service delivery, such as providing targeted pre-test and post-test genetic counselling, and investing in efficient genome sequencing pipelines to reduce waiting times. Valuing the user experience of genomic testing aligns with patient-centred approaches to the provision of healthcare.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":"23 3","pages":"425 - 439"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40258-025-00948-x.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond the Diagnosis: Valuing Genome-Wide Sequencing for Rare Disease Diagnosis Using Contingent Valuation\",\"authors\":\"Michael Abbott,&nbsp;Mandy Ryan,&nbsp;Rodolfo Hernández,&nbsp;Sebastian Heidenreich,&nbsp;Zosia Miedzybrodzka\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40258-025-00948-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background and Objective</h3><p>The utility of genome-wide sequencing is often quantified in terms of its diagnostic yield. Although obtaining a diagnosis is a fundamental aspect of value, service users also value broader clinical, informational, process and psychological factors in the provision of genomic testing. This study aims to value genome-wide sequencing from the user perspective in Scotland.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>A survey was developed and administered to 1014 patients and families with experience of genome-wide sequencing to diagnose a rare condition in Scotland. Participants’ willingness to pay for genomic testing was elicited using a contingent valuation payment card. The survey included two genomic-related patient-reported outcome measures: (i) the Personal Utility Scale (PrU) to generate scores for the personal utility of genome-wide sequencing; and (ii) a subscale of the Feelings About Genomic Testing Results (FACTOR) questionnaire to measure negative psychological outcomes. Data were also collected on participants’ prior experiences of genomic testing services. A double-hurdle regression model investigated the predictors of patients' willingness to pay for genomic testing.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 1014 invitations sent, 171 contingent valuation questionnaires were returned. Diagnosed participants reported higher personal utility on PrU than undiagnosed participants. However, both groups reported similar negative psychological outcomes on FACTOR. Diagnosed participants were willing to pay £2043 for genome-wide sequencing, compared with £835 for undiagnosed participants. Diagnostic status, waiting time for results and FACTOR scores (negative psychological outcomes) influenced users’ valuations of genome-wide sequencing.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Obtaining a diagnosis is a fundamental component of utility in the provision of genomic testing. However, there is still value to those who do not receive a diagnosis. These results have implications for service delivery, such as providing targeted pre-test and post-test genetic counselling, and investing in efficient genome sequencing pipelines to reduce waiting times. Valuing the user experience of genomic testing aligns with patient-centred approaches to the provision of healthcare.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"425 - 439\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40258-025-00948-x.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-025-00948-x\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-025-00948-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:全基因组测序的效用通常是根据其诊断率来量化的。虽然获得诊断是价值的一个基本方面,但服务用户也重视提供基因组检测的更广泛的临床、信息、过程和心理因素。本研究旨在从苏格兰用户的角度来评估全基因组测序。方法:一项调查被开发和管理的1014名患者和家庭与全基因组测序的经验,以诊断罕见的条件在苏格兰。参与者支付基因组测试的意愿是通过一张条件评估支付卡来激发的。该调查包括两项与基因组相关的患者报告的结果测量:(i)个人效用量表(PrU),用于为全基因组测序的个人效用生成分数;以及(ii)关于基因组测试结果的感受(FACTOR)问卷的子量表,以测量负面心理结果。还收集了参与者先前的基因组检测服务经验的数据。一个双栏回归模型调查了患者愿意为基因组检测付费的预测因素。结果:在发出的1014份邀请中,回收了171份条件评估问卷。确诊的参与者在PrU上的个人效用高于未确诊的参与者。然而,两组在FACTOR上报告的负面心理结果相似。确诊的参与者愿意为全基因组测序支付2043英镑,而未确诊的参与者愿意支付835英镑。诊断状态、结果等待时间和因子得分(负面心理结果)影响用户对全基因组测序的评价。结论:获得诊断是提供基因组检测的基本组成部分。然而,对于那些没有得到诊断的人来说,这仍然是有价值的。这些结果对提供服务具有影响,例如提供有针对性的检测前和检测后遗传咨询,以及投资于有效的基因组测序管道以减少等待时间。重视基因组测试的用户体验与提供医疗保健的以患者为中心的方法是一致的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond the Diagnosis: Valuing Genome-Wide Sequencing for Rare Disease Diagnosis Using Contingent Valuation

Background and Objective

The utility of genome-wide sequencing is often quantified in terms of its diagnostic yield. Although obtaining a diagnosis is a fundamental aspect of value, service users also value broader clinical, informational, process and psychological factors in the provision of genomic testing. This study aims to value genome-wide sequencing from the user perspective in Scotland.

Methods

A survey was developed and administered to 1014 patients and families with experience of genome-wide sequencing to diagnose a rare condition in Scotland. Participants’ willingness to pay for genomic testing was elicited using a contingent valuation payment card. The survey included two genomic-related patient-reported outcome measures: (i) the Personal Utility Scale (PrU) to generate scores for the personal utility of genome-wide sequencing; and (ii) a subscale of the Feelings About Genomic Testing Results (FACTOR) questionnaire to measure negative psychological outcomes. Data were also collected on participants’ prior experiences of genomic testing services. A double-hurdle regression model investigated the predictors of patients' willingness to pay for genomic testing.

Results

Of the 1014 invitations sent, 171 contingent valuation questionnaires were returned. Diagnosed participants reported higher personal utility on PrU than undiagnosed participants. However, both groups reported similar negative psychological outcomes on FACTOR. Diagnosed participants were willing to pay £2043 for genome-wide sequencing, compared with £835 for undiagnosed participants. Diagnostic status, waiting time for results and FACTOR scores (negative psychological outcomes) influenced users’ valuations of genome-wide sequencing.

Conclusions

Obtaining a diagnosis is a fundamental component of utility in the provision of genomic testing. However, there is still value to those who do not receive a diagnosis. These results have implications for service delivery, such as providing targeted pre-test and post-test genetic counselling, and investing in efficient genome sequencing pipelines to reduce waiting times. Valuing the user experience of genomic testing aligns with patient-centred approaches to the provision of healthcare.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信