1
|
Amar SN, Kamaludin M, Azlina A, K V Zainuddin MR, Sulaiman KI. Would manufacturing go for renewable energy? Manufacturers' preference towards sustainability. Heliyon 2024; 10:e27981. [PMID: 38524591 PMCID: PMC10958430 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27981] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2023] [Revised: 03/03/2024] [Accepted: 03/08/2024] [Indexed: 03/26/2024] Open
Abstract
Malaysia needs to fully utilize its renewable energy resources to meet its goal of installed capacity of 31% of renewable energy in 2025 and 40% in 2035. In order to empower renewable energy sources, the government has established a fund known as the renewable energy fund (RE FUND). In Malaysia, most manufacturing sectors contribute to the RE FUND through their monthly electricity bills due to their electricity consumption exceeding 300kwh per month. As Malaysia's highest electricity consumer, the manufacturing sector needs government investment incentives to switch to renewable energy sources to generate electricity. Therefore, this study was conducted to identify attribute preferences of the manufacturing sector due to investing in renewable energy sources. The Choice Experiment method was employed where the Mixed Logit model was chosen to identify the willingness to pay for the manufacturing sectors based on their preferences among the four attributes: types of renewable energy, project location, annual reduction in GHG emissions, and RE FUND. The study results found that the manufacturing sector places the highest value on the project location, where they prefer to improve the project location from current condition to far location. This study can also help to achieve the Goal 7 in the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG), where investment in renewable energy sources can guarantee that all individuals obtain affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern electricity in 2030.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Siti Noradiah Amar
- Faculty of Business, Economics, and Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia
| | - Mahirah Kamaludin
- Faculty of Business, Economics, and Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia
- Institute of Tropical Agriculture & Food Security, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia
| | - A.A. Azlina
- Faculty of Business, Economics, and Social Development, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schuster ALR, Crossnohere NL, Bachini M, Blair CK, Carpten JD, Claus EB, Colditz GA, Ding L, Drake BF, Fields RC, Janeway KA, Kwan BM, Lenz HJ, Ma Q, Mishra SI, Paskett ED, Rebbeck TR, Ricker C, Stern MC, Sussman AL, Tiner JC, Trent JM, Verhaak RGW, Wagle N, Willman C, Bridges JFP. Priorities to Promote Participant Engagement in the Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2023; 32:487-495. [PMID: 36791345 PMCID: PMC10068438 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-22-0356] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Revised: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 02/07/2023] [Indexed: 02/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Engaging diverse populations in cancer genomics research is of critical importance and is a fundamental goal of the NCI Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network. Established as part of the Cancer Moonshot, PE-CGS is a consortium of stakeholders including clinicians, scientists, genetic counselors, and representatives of potential study participants and their communities. Participant engagement is an ongoing, bidirectional, and mutually beneficial interaction between study participants and researchers. PE-CGS sought to set priorities in participant engagement for conducting the network's research. METHODS PE-CGS deliberatively engaged its stakeholders in the following four-phase process to set the network's research priorities in participant engagement: (i) a brainstorming exercise to elicit potential priorities; (ii) a 2-day virtual meeting to discuss priorities; (iii) recommendations from the PE-CGS External Advisory Panel to refine priorities; and (iv) a virtual meeting to set priorities. RESULTS Nearly 150 PE-CGS stakeholders engaged in the process. Five priorities were set: (i) tailor education and communication materials for participants throughout the research process; (ii) identify measures of participant engagement; (iii) identify optimal participant engagement strategies; (iv) understand cancer disparities in the context of cancer genomics research; and (v) personalize the return of genomics findings to participants. CONCLUSIONS PE-CGS is pursuing these priorities to meaningfully engage diverse and underrepresented patients with cancer and posttreatment cancer survivors as participants in cancer genomics research and, subsequently, generate new discoveries. IMPACT Data from PE-CGS will be shared with the broader scientific community in a manner consistent with participant informed consent and community agreement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne LR. Schuster
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Norah L. Crossnohere
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | | | - Cindy K. Blair
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center and Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico
| | - John D. Carpten
- Institute of Translational Genomics, Department of Translational Genomics, Keck School of Medicine USC, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Elizabeth B. Claus
- Department of Biostatistics, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, Connecticut
- Department of Neurosurgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Graham A. Colditz
- Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Li Ding
- Division of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Bettina F. Drake
- Division of Public Health Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Ryan C. Fields
- Division of General Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Katherine A. Janeway
- Dana-Farber / Boston Children's Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, and Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Bethany M. Kwan
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Heinz-Josef Lenz
- Keck School of Medicine of USC, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Qin Ma
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Shiraz I. Mishra
- Departments of Pediatrics and Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico
| | - Electra D. Paskett
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine; Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Timothy R. Rebbeck
- Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Charité Ricker
- Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Keck School of Medicine USC, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Mariana C. Stern
- Department of Population and Public Health Sciences & Urology, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, California
| | - Andrew L. Sussman
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico Comprehensive Cancer Center and Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico
| | - Jessica C. Tiner
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland
| | - Jeffrey M. Trent
- Translational Genomics Research Institute part of City of Hope, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Roel GW. Verhaak
- The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut
| | - Nikhil Wagle
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Harvard Medical School, Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center, and Count Me In, Boston, Massachusetts
| | - Cheryl Willman
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic Comprehensive Cancer Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
- University of New Mexico School of Medicine and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico
| | - John FP. Bridges
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hoxha I, Duraj B, Xharra S, Avdaj A, Beqiri V, Grezda K, Selmani E, Avdiu B, Cegllar J, Marušič D, Osmani A. Clinical Decision-Making for Appendectomy in Kosovo: A Conjoint Analysis. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:14027. [PMID: 36360907 PMCID: PMC9654723 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192114027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 10/23/2022] [Accepted: 10/26/2022] [Indexed: 06/16/2023]
Abstract
Objective: The objective was to investigate the association of clinical attributes with decision making for performing appendectomy and making preoperative preparations for appendectomy. Method: A conjoint analysis with 17 clinical scenarios was executed with surgeons employed at public hospitals in Kosovo. Setting: The study was conducted at two public hospitals in Kosovo that have benefited from quality-improvement interventions. Participants: The participants included 22 surgeons. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was the overall effect of clinical attributes on the decision to perform appendectomy and make the preoperative preparations for appendectomy. Results: In the regression analyses, several attributes demonstrated statistically significant effects on the clinical decision to perform appendectomy and on the practice of preoperative preparation. Conclusions: We found that several factors influenced the decision to perform appendectomy and the practices for preoperative preparation. Nevertheless, the small sample size limited our efforts to interpret the results. These findings could assist Kosovo in the design and implementation of future similar studies and in fostering quality improvement measures that address clinical decision making and the lack of process standardization in the delivery of surgical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilir Hoxha
- The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH 03766, USA
- Evidence Synthesis Group, 10000 Prishtina, Kosovo
- Research Unit, Heimerer College, 10000 Prishtina, Kosovo
- Lux Development, 10000 Prishtina, Kosovo
| | - Bajram Duraj
- General Hospital of Prizren, 20000 Prizren, Kosovo
| | - Shefki Xharra
- General Hospital of Prizren, 20000 Prizren, Kosovo
- General Hospital of Gjilan, 60000 Gjilan, Kosovo
| | - Afrim Avdaj
- General Hospital of Prizren, 20000 Prizren, Kosovo
| | - Valon Beqiri
- The Faculty of Medicine, University of Rijeka, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia
| | - Krenare Grezda
- Evidence Synthesis Group, 10000 Prishtina, Kosovo
- Research Unit, Heimerer College, 10000 Prishtina, Kosovo
| | - Erza Selmani
- Evidence Synthesis Group, 10000 Prishtina, Kosovo
- Research Unit, Heimerer College, 10000 Prishtina, Kosovo
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hollin IL, Paskett J, Schuster ALR, Crossnohere NL, Bridges JFP. Best-Worst Scaling and the Prioritization of Objects in Health: A Systematic Review. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2022; 40:883-899. [PMID: 35838889 PMCID: PMC9363399 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-022-01167-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/12/2022] [Indexed: 05/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Best-worst scaling is a theory-driven method that can be used to prioritize objects in health. We sought to characterize all studies of best-worst scaling to prioritize objects in health, to assess trends of using best-worst scaling in prioritization over time, and to assess the relationship between a legacy measure of quality (PREFS) and a novel assessment of subjective quality and policy relevance. METHODS A systematic review identified studies published through to the end of 2021 that applied best-worst scaling to study priorities in health (PROSPERO CRD42020209745), updating a prior review published in 2016. The PubMed, EBSCOhost, Embase, Scopus, APA PsychInfo, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were used and were supplemented by a hand search. Data describing the application, development, design, administration/analysis, quality, and policy relevance were summarized and we tested for trends by comparing articles before and after 1 January, 2017. Multivariate statistics were then used to assess the relationships between PREFS, subjective quality, policy relevance, and other possible indicators. RESULTS From a total of 2826 unique papers identified, 165 best-worst scaling studies were included in this review. Applications of best-worst scaling to study priorities in health have continued to grow (p < 0.01) and are now used in all regions of the world, most often to study the priorities of patients/consumers (67%). Several key trends can be observed over time: increased use of pretesting (p < 0.05); increased use of online administration (p < 0.01), and decreased use of paper self-administered surveys (p = 0.02); increased use of heterogeneity analysis (p = 0.02); an increase in having a clearly stated purpose (p < 0.01); and a decrease in comparing respondents to non-respondents (p = 0.01). The average sample size has more than doubled, from 228 to 472 respondents, but formal sample size justifications remain low (5.3%) and unchanged over time (p = 0.68). While the average PREFS score remained unchanged at 3.1/5, both subjective quality and policy relevance trended up, but changes were not statistically significant (p = 0.06 and p = 0.13). Most of the variation in subjective quality was driven by PREFS (R2 = 0.42), but it was also positively assosciated with policy relevance, heterogeneity analysis, and using a balanced incomplete block design, and was negatively associated with not using developmental methods and an increasing sample size. CONCLUSIONS Using best-worst scaling to prioritize objects is now commonly used around the world to assess the priorities of patients and other stakeholders in health. Best practices are clearly emerging for best-worst scaling. Although legacy measures (PREFS) to measure study quality are reasonable, there may need to be new tools to assess both study quality and policy relevance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ilene L Hollin
- Department of Health Services Administration and Policy, Temple University College of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jonathan Paskett
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Anne L R Schuster
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Norah L Crossnohere
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - John F P Bridges
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Sigurdson S, Harrison M, Pearce A, Richardson H, Zaza K, Brundage M. One Fraction Size Does Not Fit All: Patient Preferences for Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy From a Discrete Choice Experiment. Pract Radiat Oncol 2022; 12:e24-e33. [PMID: 34991857 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2021.08.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Revised: 07/29/2021] [Accepted: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a standard of care option for localized prostate cancer. To inform clinical practice we quantified patients' preferences for convenience, efficacy, and toxicity risks, of conventional, moderate hypofractionation, and stereotactic radiation therapy regimens. METHODS AND MATERIALS We used a discrete choice experiment with a voluntary sample consisting of patients treated with EBRT for localized prostate cancer at our academic cancer center. In 2019, 58 participants, mean (SD) age of 72.9 (7.1) years, agreed to complete an in-person 1:1 discrete choice experiment. Each participant made 12 choices between 2 unique EBRT scenarios, each described by 5 attributes: (1) treatment time; (2) fiducial markers; and risk of (3) prostate specific antigen recurrence; (4) acute and (5) late GI or GU toxicity. Patient preferences were estimated using mixed multinomial logistic regression, and prespecified subgroups with conditional logistic regression. RESULTS All attributes were statistically significant, thus influenced participants' choices. Risks of prostate specific antigen recurrence (β = -2.581), late (β = -1.854), and acute (β = -1.005) toxicity were most important to participants (P < .001 for each), followed by EBRT length (β = -0.728; P = .017) and fiducial marker implantation (β = -0.563; P = .004). Older (β = -0.063; 95% confidence interval, -0.12, -0.01) and rural (β = -0.083; 95% CI -0.14, -0.02) participants significantly preferred shorter EBRT and were less willing-to-extend treatment to reduce toxicity risk. CONCLUSIONS Patients with prostate cancer place importance on EBRT attributes, and some are willing to trade-off increased risk of toxicity for improved convenience. Our findings promote shared clinical decision-making because patients are interested in learning about the trade-offs involved.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samantha Sigurdson
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
| | - Mark Harrison
- Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Alison Pearce
- Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Harriet Richardson
- Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Khaled Zaza
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| | - Michael Brundage
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Centre of Southeastern Ontario, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queen's University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2019; 13:121-136. [DOI: 10.1007/s40271-019-00401-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 67] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
|
7
|
Abstract
This Review presents current epidemiological trends of the most common liver diseases in Asia-Pacific countries. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) remains the primary cause of cirrhosis; despite declining prevalence in most Asian nations, this virus still poses a severe threat in some territories and regions. Mortality resulting from HBV infection is declining as a result of preventive measures and antiviral treatments. The epidemiological transition of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has varied in the region in the past few decades, but the medical burden of infection and the prevalence of its related cancers are increasing. The lack of licensed HCV vaccines highlights the need for novel treatment strategies. The prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has risen in the past decade, mostly owing to increasingly urbanized lifestyles and dietary changes. Alternative herbal medicine and dietary supplements are major causes of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in some countries. Complications arising from these chronic liver diseases, including cirrhosis and liver cancer, are therefore emerging threats in the Asia-Pacific region. Key strategies to control these liver diseases include monitoring of at-risk populations, implementation of national guidelines and increasing public and physician awareness, in concert with improving access to health care.
Collapse
|
8
|
Bao Y, Wang S, Yang X, Li T, Xia Y, Meng X. Metabolomic study of the intervention effects of Shuihonghuazi Formula, a Traditional Chinese Medicinal formulae, on hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) rats using performance HPLC/ESI-TOF-MS. JOURNAL OF ETHNOPHARMACOLOGY 2017; 198:468-478. [PMID: 28108381 DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2017.01.029] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2016] [Revised: 01/11/2017] [Accepted: 01/16/2017] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE Metabolomics is the comprehensive assessment of endogenous metabolites of a biological system in a holistic context, and its property consists with the global view of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). Shuihonghuazi Formula (SHHZF) has been used for liver cancer early treatment in clinical for more than thirty years, but its mechanism remains unclear completely. This paper was designed to explore the therapeutic effects of SHHZF on liver cancer and its metabolomic characters. MATERIALS AND METHODS All the rats were given diethylnitrosamine (DEN) at the dosage of 70mg/kg for 14 weeks. From the 7th weeks, SHHZF was given to the rats which lasted for 10 weeks. Therapeutic effects of SHHZF was compared with that of cyclophosphamide (CTX). High performance liquid-chromatography/electrospray-ionization time of flight mass spectrometer (HPLC/ESI-TOF-MS) combined with pattern recognition approaches including principal component analysis (PCA), partial least squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA), was integrated to approximate the comprehensive metabolic signature and discover differentiating metabolites by Agilent MPP 12.1. The changes in metabolic profiling in plasma were restored to their baseline values after SHHZF treatment according to the PLS-DA score plots. RESULTS The results indicated that 23 ions as "differentiating metabolites". The alterations in those metabolites were associated with perturbations in fatty acid and bile acid metabolism, in response to liver cancer through immune and nervous system. And SHHZF could increase the uptake and utilization of linoleic acid and oleic acid, increase arachidonic acid-like substance content and enhance organism immunity of liver cancer rats. And it also could increase the translation from phosphatidylethanolamine (PE) to phosphatidylcholine (PC), linoleic acid metabolism and inhibits abnormal metabolism of bile acid. CONCLUSIONS The mechanism of therapeutic effects of SHHZF on liver cancer by adjusting the activities of PE N-methyl transferase (PEMT), Lysophospholipase D, methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) and lysophospholipase was elucidated by the method of metabonomics for the first time.
Collapse
MESH Headings
- Animals
- Bile Acids and Salts/metabolism
- Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/drug therapy
- Carcinoma, Hepatocellular/pathology
- Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid/methods
- Discriminant Analysis
- Drugs, Chinese Herbal/pharmacology
- Least-Squares Analysis
- Lipid Metabolism/drug effects
- Liver Neoplasms, Experimental/drug therapy
- Liver Neoplasms, Experimental/pathology
- Male
- Medicine, Chinese Traditional
- Metabolomics/methods
- Principal Component Analysis
- Rats
- Rats, Sprague-Dawley
- Spectrometry, Mass, Electrospray Ionization/methods
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yongrui Bao
- College of Pharmacy, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Dalian 116600, PR China; Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine-Agilent Technologies Modern TCM and Multi-omics Research Collaboration Lab, Dalian 116600, PR China
| | - Shuai Wang
- College of Pharmacy, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Dalian 116600, PR China; Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine-Agilent Technologies Modern TCM and Multi-omics Research Collaboration Lab, Dalian 116600, PR China
| | - Xinxin Yang
- College of Pharmacy, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Dalian 116600, PR China
| | - Tianjiao Li
- College of Pharmacy, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Dalian 116600, PR China
| | - Yueming Xia
- College of Pharmacy, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Dalian 116600, PR China
| | - Xiansheng Meng
- College of Pharmacy, Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Dalian 116600, PR China; Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine-Agilent Technologies Modern TCM and Multi-omics Research Collaboration Lab, Dalian 116600, PR China.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
Background. The use of qualitative research (QR) methods is recommended as good practice in discrete choice experiments (DCEs). This study investigated the use and reporting of QR to inform the design and/or interpretation of healthcare-related DCEs and explored the perceived usefulness of such methods. Methods. DCEs were identified from a systematic search of the MEDLINE database. Studies were classified by the quantity of QR reported (none, basic, or extensive). Authors (n = 91) of papers reporting the use of QR were invited to complete an online survey eliciting their views about using the methods. Results. A total of 254 healthcare DCEs were included in the review; of these, 111 (44%) did not report using any qualitative methods; 114 (45%) reported “basic” information; and 29 (11%) reported or cited “extensive” use of qualitative methods. Studies reporting the use of qualitative methods used them to select attributes and/or levels (n = 95; 66%) and/or pilot the DCE survey (n = 26; 18%). Popular qualitative methods included focus groups (n = 63; 44%) and interviews (n = 109; 76%). Forty-four studies (31%) reported the analytical approach, with content (n = 10; 7%) and framework analysis (n = 5; 4%) most commonly reported. The survey identified that all responding authors (n = 50; 100%) found that qualitative methods added value to their DCE study, but many (n = 22; 44%) reported that journals were uninterested in the reporting of QR results. Conclusions. Despite recommendations that QR methods be used alongside DCEs, the use of QR methods is not consistently reported. The lack of reporting risks the inference that QR methods are of little use in DCE research, contradicting practitioners’ assessments. Explicit guidelines would enable more clarity and consistency in reporting, and journals should facilitate such reporting via online supplementary materials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caroline Vass
- Manchester Centre for Health Economics, University of Manchester, UK (CV, KP)
| | - Dan Rigby
- Department of Economics, University of Manchester, UK (DR)
| | - Katherine Payne
- Manchester Centre for Health Economics, University of Manchester, UK (CV, KP)
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
de Bekker-Grob EW, Donkers B, Jonker MF, Stolk EA. Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2016; 8:373-84. [PMID: 25726010 PMCID: PMC4575371 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-015-0118-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 424] [Impact Index Per Article: 53.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) have become a commonly used instrument in health economics and patient-preference analysis, addressing a wide range of policy questions. An important question when setting up a DCE is the size of the sample needed to answer the research question of interest. Although theory exists as to the calculation of sample size requirements for stated choice data, it does not address the issue of minimum sample size requirements in terms of the statistical power of hypothesis tests on the estimated coefficients. The purpose of this paper is threefold: (1) to provide insight into whether and how researchers have dealt with sample size calculations for healthcare-related DCE studies; (2) to introduce and explain the required sample size for parameter estimates in DCEs; and (3) to provide a step-by-step guide for the calculation of the minimum sample size requirements for DCEs in health care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esther W de Bekker-Grob
- Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Bas Donkers
- Department of Business Economics, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel F Jonker
- Department of Health Economics, Policy and Law, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Elly A Stolk
- Department of Health Economics, Policy and Law, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Bridges JFP, Joy SM, Blauvelt BM, Yan W, Marsteller JA. An international comparison of stakeholder motivation to implement liver cancer control. Health Policy Plan 2014; 30:645-55. [PMID: 24974105 DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czu044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 04/29/2014] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The World Health Organization offers clear guidance on the development of national cancer control programmes based on a country's level of resources, yet the motivation to implement such programmes may be driven by factors other than resources. OBJECTIVES To compare stakeholder motivation to implement a national liver cancer control programme and assess if variation in motivation was associated with stakeholder characteristics or with national indicators of need and resources. METHODS Relevant stakeholders were purposively selected from 13 countries (Australia, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Nigeria, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey and USA) to participate in a structured survey on liver cancer control. Respondents included 12 individuals working in clinical, 5 in policy and 3 in advocacy roles from each country. Stakeholders' motivation was measured using a scale grounded in expectancy theory and knowledge gained during previous qualitative interviews. Comparisons across countries and respondent characteristics were conducted using hierarchical regression. Country level motivation scores, holding constant individual level covariates, were correlated with indicators of need and resources and tested using Pearson's correlation coefficients. RESULTS In total, 260 stakeholders, equally drawn from the study countries, completed the survey (45% response rate). At the national level, motivation was highest in Nigeria, Thailand and China (P < 0.001), and lowest in Italy (P < 0.001) and Germany (P = 0.003). Higher motivation was observed among stakeholders working at the international level relative to the local level (P = 0.017). Motivation was positively associated with a country's relative burden of liver cancer (P = 0.015) and negatively associated with their level of resources (P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS This study provides the first empirical evidence on the motivation of stakeholders to implement national cancer control programmes. Furthermore, we demonstrate that motivation is more clearly associated with a country's cancer control needs rather than resources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John F P Bridges
- Department of Health Policy and Management and Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Institute for Global Health, University of Massachusetts, Amhurst, MA 01003, USA and Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA and Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Susan M Joy
- Department of Health Policy and Management and Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Institute for Global Health, University of Massachusetts, Amhurst, MA 01003, USA and Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA and Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Barri M Blauvelt
- Department of Health Policy and Management and Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Institute for Global Health, University of Massachusetts, Amhurst, MA 01003, USA and Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA and Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Weili Yan
- Department of Health Policy and Management and Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Institute for Global Health, University of Massachusetts, Amhurst, MA 01003, USA and Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA and Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| | - Jill A Marsteller
- Department of Health Policy and Management and Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA, Institute for Global Health, University of Massachusetts, Amhurst, MA 01003, USA and Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA and Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21202, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Schuster ALR, Aslakson RA, Bridges JFP. Creating an advance-care-planning decision aid for high-risk surgery: a qualitative study. BMC Palliat Care 2014; 13:32. [PMID: 25067908 PMCID: PMC4110535 DOI: 10.1186/1472-684x-13-32] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2014] [Accepted: 06/12/2014] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND High-risk surgery patients may lose decision-making capacity as a result of surgical complications. Advance care planning prior to surgery may be beneficial, but remains controversial and is hindered by a lack of appropriate decision aids. This study sought to examine stakeholders' views on the appropriateness of using decision aids, in general, to support advance care planning among high-risk surgery populations and the design of such a decision aid. METHODS Key informants were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling. Semi-structured interviews were conducted by phone until data collected reached theoretical saturation. Key informants were asked to discuss their thoughts about advance care planning and interventions to support advance care planning, particularly for this population. Researchers took de-identified notes that were analyzed for emerging concordant, discordant, and recurrent themes using interpretative phenomenological analysis. RESULTS Key informants described the importance of initiating advance care planning preoperatively, despite potential challenges present in surgical settings. In general, decision aids were viewed as an appropriate approach to support advance care planning for this population. A recipe emerged from the data that outlines tools, ingredients, and tips for success that are needed to design an advance care planning decision aid for high-risk surgical settings. CONCLUSIONS Stakeholders supported incorporating advance care planning in high-risk surgical settings and endorsed the appropriateness of using decision aids to do so. Findings will inform the next stages of developing the first advance care planning decision aid for high-risk surgery patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne LR Schuster
- Department of Health Policy and Management, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Rebecca A Aslakson
- Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - John FP Bridges
- Department of Health Policy and Management, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Fashoyin-Aje L, Sanghavi K, Bjornard K, Bodurtha J. Integrating genetic and genomic information into effective cancer care in diverse populations. Ann Oncol 2013; 24 Suppl 7:vii48-54. [PMID: 24001763 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt264] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
This paper provides an overview of issues in the integration of genetic (related to hereditary DNA) and genomic (related to genes and their functions) information in cancer care for individuals and families who are part of health care systems worldwide, from low to high resourced. National and regional cancer plans have the potential to integrate genetic and genomic information with a goal of identifying and helping individuals and families with and at risk of cancer. Healthcare professionals and the public have the opportunity to increase their genetic literacy and communication about cancer family history to enhance cancer control, prevention, and tailored therapies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Fashoyin-Aje
- Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, 600 N. Wolfe St., Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Joy SM, Blauvelt BM, Tuncer MA, Beaugrand M, Sangro B, Colombo M, Bridges JFP. Stakeholder perspectives on European priorities for comprehensive liver cancer control: a conjoint analysis. Eur J Public Health 2013; 23:951-7. [PMID: 23531524 DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/cks173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND As liver cancer incidence and mortality remain high in many parts of Europe, a more comprehensive response is required to reduce the burden. Expert stakeholders should be involved in the design of responses because they have important insights about potentially effective responses and will be affected by policy changes. We aimed to prioritize liver cancer control strategies based on European liver cancer stakeholders' views of which strategies would have the greatest impact in a comprehensive liver cancer control plan. METHODS One hundred liver cancer clinical, policy and advocacy stakeholders from France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Turkey were surveyed. Respondents completed 12 conjoint choice tasks in which they chose which of two subsets of 11 strategies would have the greatest impact in their country. RESULTS All strategies were considered likely to have a positive impact (P < 0.01). The highest priority strategy was monitoring of at-risk populations, followed by centres of excellence, clinical education, multidisciplinary management, national guidelines, measuring social burden, public awareness, risk assessment and referral, research infrastructure and access to treatments. CONCLUSIONS Canvassing stakeholder views through a conjoint analysis survey provided a robust quantitative prioritization that can complement traditional qualitative consultation processes. The prioritized strategies provide a logical starting point for decision makers considering developing national plans or collaborative efforts to achieve comprehensive liver cancer control in Europe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan M Joy
- 1 Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Prioritizing strategies for comprehensive liver cancer control in Asia: a conjoint analysis. BMC Health Serv Res 2012; 12:376. [PMID: 23110423 PMCID: PMC3529196 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-376] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/10/2012] [Accepted: 10/02/2012] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Liver cancer is a complex and burdensome disease, with Asia accounting for 75% of known cases. Comprehensive cancer control requires the use of multiple strategies, but various stakeholders may have different views as to which strategies should have the highest priority. This study identified priorities across multiple strategies for comprehensive liver cancer control (CLCC) from the perspective of liver cancer clinical, policy, and advocacy stakeholders in China, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. Concordance of priorities was assessed across the region and across respondent roles. Methods Priorities for CLCC were examined as part of a cross-sectional survey of liver cancer experts. Respondents completed several conjoint-analysis choice tasks to prioritize 11 strategies. In each task, respondents judged which of two competing CLCC plans, consisting of mutually exclusive and exhaustive subsets of the strategies, would have the greatest impact. The dependent variable was the chosen plan, which was then regressed on the strategies of different plans. The restricted least squares (RLS) method was utilized to compare aggregate and stratified models, and t-tests and Wald tests were used to test for significance and concordance, respectively. Results Eighty respondents (69.6%) were eligible and completed the survey. Their primary interests were hepatitis (26%), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (58%), metastatic liver cancer (10%) and transplantation (6%). The most preferred strategies were monitoring at-risk populations (p<0.001), clinician education (p<0.001), and national guidelines (p<0.001). Most priorities were concordant across sites except for three strategies: transplantation infrastructure (p=0.009) was valued lower in China, measuring social burden (p=0.037) was valued higher in Taiwan, and national guidelines (p=0.025) was valued higher in China. Priorities did not differ across stakeholder groups (p=0.438). Conclusions Priorities for CLCC in Asia include monitoring at-risk populations, clinician education, national guidelines, multidisciplinary management, public awareness and centers of excellence. As most priorities are relatively concordant across the region, multilateral approaches to addressing comprehensive liver cancer would be beneficial. However, where priorities are discordant among sites, such as transplantation infrastructure, strategies should be tailored to local needs.
Collapse
|