James G. Dolan|Emily A. Boohaker|Jeroan J. Allison|Thomas F. Imperiale
Patients’ Preferences and Priorities Regarding Colorectal Cancer Screening
University of Rochester Medical Center|University of Alabama at Birmingham|University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School|Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis|Regenstrief Institute|University of Rochester Medical Center|University of Alabama at Birmingham|University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School|Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis|Regenstrief Institute|University of Rochester Medical Center|University of Alabama at Birmingham|University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School|Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis|Regenstrief Institute|University of Rochester Medical Center|University of Alabama at Birmingham|University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School|Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis|Regenstrief Institute
background us colorectal cancer screening guidelines people average risk colorectal cancer endorse multiple screening options recommend screening decisions reflect individual patient preferences methods authors used analytic hierarchy process ahp ascertain decision priorities people average risk colorectal cancer attending primary care practices rochester new york birmingham alabama indianapolis indiana analysis included 4 decision criteria 3 subcriteria 10 options results four hundred eightyfour people completed study 66 female 49 african american 9 low literacy skills 27 low numeracy skills overall preventing cancer given highest priority mean priority 55 followed avoiding screening test side effects mean priority 17 minimizing falsepositive test results mean priority 15 combined priority screening frequency test preparation test procedures mean priority 14 hierarchical cluster analysis revealed 6 distinct priority groupings containing multiple instances decision priorities differed average value factor 4 90 study participants fully understood concepts involved 79 met ahp analysis quality standards 88 willing use similar methods help make important health care decisions conclusion results highlight need facilitate incorporation patient preferences colorectal cancer screening decisions large number study participants able willing perform complex ahp analysis used study suggests ahp useful tool identifying patientspecific priorities needed ensure screening decisions appropriately reflect individual patient preferences