Cited by 24Economic and Environmental ValuationEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric HealthcareHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Finding Out What Matters in Decision-Making Related to Genomics and Personalized Medicine in Pediatric Oncology: Developing Attributes to Include in a Discrete Choice Experiment

McCarthy, Maria C., De Abreu Lourenco, Richard, McMillan, Laura J., Meshcheriakova, Elena, Cao, Alice, Gillam, Lynn·2020·The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research

Abstract

Background Treatment decision-making in pediatric oncology can be complex. Recent advances in genome sequencing and novel or 'personalized' therapies potentially increases the complexity of decision-making and treatment options. Objectives This study explored the views and experiences of healthcare providers (HCPs) and parents with respect to decision-making in difficult-to-treat cancers, including genomic decision-making. Methods A two-phase qualitative study was undertaken in which oncologists and nurses and parents of children with relapsed and refractory cancers were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analyzed thematically, with a focus on measurable themes relevant to the development of candidate attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE). Secondly, a review of studies that utilized stated preference experiments in the fields of genomics, medical decision-making, and pediatrics was undertaken and compared with the candidate attributes identified from interviews. Results Six candidate attributes were developed from the interview themes: clinical benefit, quality of life (QoL) including both treatment effects and functionality, likelihood of a target, cost (who pays), recommendation of HCP or extent family supported the decision, and whether a biopsy was needed. Two further candidate attributes were identified from the literature review: severity of illness and cost (dollar amount). Conclusions This study identified eight candidate attributes that will be further validated prior to developing a DCE aimed at better understanding factors influencing decision-making related to genomic sequencing and personalized medicine. This study and the proposed DCE will contribute to improving ethical and clinical practices in the application of novel genomic technology in pediatric oncology.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40271-020-00411-0

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. De Abreu Lourenco R, Viney J, M, Haas M, King M, Kenny P. Economic evaluation of genetic screening using choice modelling. 22nd Australian Conference of Health Economics 2001.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
McCarthy, M. C., De Abreu Lourenco, R., McMillan, L. J., Meshcheriakova, E., Cao, A., & Gillam, L.
Affiliations
  • Royal Children's Hospital (AU)
  • Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU)
  • University of Technology Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
McCarthy, Maria C.
Venue
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
Published
2020-02-10
Volume
13
Issue
3
Pages
347-361
ISSN
  • 1178-1653 (ISSN-L)
  • 1178-1661
OpenAlex
W3005685261
Cited by
24
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2
FWCI
3.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Patient (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Victorian Cancer Agency (HSR15034)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
pediatric oncology, personalized medicine, discrete choice experiment, candidate characteristics, stated preference, relapsed/refractory cancer, healthcare providers' perspectives, parents' perspectives, genome sequencing, quality of life, cost, biopsy, family support
MeSH terms
Adult, Australia, Choice Behavior, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, New Zealand, Pediatrics, Genomics, Qualitative Research, Young Adult, Precision Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review