Dataset Information

Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics.

ABSTRACT: Policies such as the Cancer Drugs Fund in England assumed a societal preference to fund cancer care relative to other conditions, even if that resulted in lower health gain for the population overall.The aim of this study was to investigate the evidence for such a preference among the UK public.The MEDLINE, PubMed and Econlit electronic databases were searched for studies relating to preferences for prioritising cancer treatment, as well as studies relating to preferences for the characteristics of cancer (severity of disease, end-of-life). The searches were run in November 2015 and updated in March 2017. Empirical preference studies, studies of public views, and studies in English were included.We identified 24 studies relating to cancer preferences. Two directly addressed health trade-offs in the UK-one showed a preference for health gain in cancer, while the other found no such preference but provided results consistent with population health maximisation. Other studies mostly showed support for cancer but did not require a direct health trade-off. Severity and end-of-life searches identified 12 and 6 papers, respectively, which were additional to existing reviews. There is consistent evidence that people give priority to severe illness, while results for end-of-life are mixed.We did not find consistent support for a preference for health gains to cancer patients in the context of health maximisation. The evidence base is small and the results are highly sensitive to study design. There remains a contradiction between these findings and the popular view of cancer, and further work is required to determine the features of cancer which contribute to that view.

SUBMITTER: Morrell L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5548817 | biostudies-other | 2017 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics.

Morrell Liz L Wordsworth Sarah S Rees Sian S Barker Richard R

PharmacoEconomics 20170801 8

<h4>Background</h4>Policies such as the Cancer Drugs Fund in England assumed a societal preference to fund cancer care relative to other conditions, even if that resulted in lower health gain for the population overall.<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to investigate the evidence for such a preference among the UK public.<h4>Methods</h4>The MEDLINE, PubMed and Econlit electronic databases were searched for studies relating to preferences for prioritising cancer treatment, as well as st ...[more]

PMID: 28455834

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe increasing involvement of pharmacists in public health will require changes in the behaviour of both pharmacists and the general public. A great deal of research has shown that attitudes and beliefs are important determinants of behaviour. This review aims to examine the beliefs and attitudes of pharmacists and consumers towards pharmaceutical public health in order to inform how best to support and improve this service.MethodsFive electronic databases were searched for articles published in English between 2001 and 2010. Titles and abstracts were screened by one researcher according to the inclusion criteria. Papers were included if they assessed pharmacy staff or consumer attitudes towards pharmaceutical public health. Full papers identified for inclusion were assessed by a second researcher and data were extracted by one researcher.ResultsFrom the 5628 papers identified, 63 studies in 67 papers were included. Pharmacy staff: Most pharmacists viewed public health services as important and part of their role but secondary to medicine related roles. Pharmacists' confidence in providing public health services was on the whole average to low. Time was consistently identified as a barrier to providing public health services. Lack of an adequate counselling space, lack of demand and expectation of a negative reaction from customers were also reported by some pharmacists as barriers. A need for further training was identified in relation to a number of public health services. Consumers: Most pharmacy users had never been offered public health services by their pharmacist and did not expect to be offered. Consumers viewed pharmacists as appropriate providers of public health advice but had mixed views on the pharmacists' ability to do this. Satisfaction was found to be high in those that had experienced pharmaceutical public healthConclusionsThere has been little change in customer and pharmacist attitudes since reviews conducted nearly 10 years previously. In order to improve the public health services provided in community pharmacy, training must aim to increase pharmacists' confidence in providing these services. Confident, well trained pharmacists should be able to offer public health service more proactively which is likely to have a positive impact on customer attitudes and health.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Adaptations of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) often occur. However, little is known about the reasons for adaptation, the adaptation process, and outcomes of adapted EBIs. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic review to answer the following questions: (1) What are the reasons for and common types of adaptations being made to EBIs in community settings as reported in the published literature? (2) What steps are described in making adaptations to EBIs? and (3) What outcomes are assessed in evaluations of adapted EBIs? METHODS:We conducted a systematic review of English language publications that described adaptations of public health EBIs. We searched Ovid PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycNET, and CINAHL and citations of included studies for adapted public health EBIs. We abstracted characteristics of the original and adapted populations and settings, reasons for adaptation, types of modifications, use of an adaptation framework, adaptation steps, and evaluation outcomes. RESULTS:Forty-two distinct EBIs were found focusing on HIV/AIDS, mental health, substance abuse, and chronic illnesses. More than half (62%) reported on adaptations in the USA. Frequent reasons for adaptation included the need for cultural appropriateness (64.3%), focusing on a new target population (59.5%), and implementing in a new setting (57.1%). Common adaptations were content (100%), context (95.2%), cultural modifications (73.8%), and delivery (61.9%). Most study authors conducted a community assessment, prepared new materials, implemented the adapted intervention, evaluated or planned to evaluate the intervention, determined needed changes, trained staff members, and consulted experts/stakeholders. Most studies that reported an evaluation (k?=?36) included behavioral outcomes (71.4%), acceptability (66.7%), fidelity (52.4%), and feasibility (52.4%). Fewer measured adoption (47.6%) and changes in practice (21.4%). CONCLUSIONS:These findings advance our understanding of the patterns and effects of modifications of EBIs that are reported in published studies and suggest areas of further research to understand and guide the adaptation process. Furthermore, findings can inform better reporting of adapted EBIs and inform capacity building efforts to assist health professionals in adapting EBIs.

Project description:BackgroundImmunocompromised patients are vulnerable to severe or complicated influenza infection. Vaccination is widely recommended for this group. This systematic review and meta-analysis assesses influenza vaccination for immunocompromised patients in terms of preventing influenza-like illness and laboratory confirmed influenza, serological response and adverse events.Methodology/principal findingsElectronic databases and grey literature were searched and records were screened against eligibility criteria. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed in duplicate. Results were synthesised narratively and meta-analyses were conducted where feasible. Heterogeneity was assessed using I(2) and publication bias was assessed using Begg's funnel plot and Egger's regression test. Many of the 209 eligible studies included an unclear or high risk of bias. Meta-analyses showed a significant effect of preventing influenza-like illness (odds ratio [OR]=0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.16-0.34; p<0.001) and laboratory confirmed influenza infection (OR=0.15; 95% CI=0.03-0.63; p=0.01) through vaccinating immunocompromised patie nts compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls. We found no difference in the odds of influenza-like illness compared to vaccinated immunocompetent controls. The pooled odds of seroconversion were lower in vaccinated patients compared to immunocompetent controls for seasonal influenza A(H1N1), A(H3N2) and B. A similar trend was identified for seroprotection. Meta-analyses of seroconversion showed higher odds in vaccinated patients compared to placebo or unvaccinated controls, although this reached significance for influenza B only. Publication bias was not detected and narrative synthesis supported our findings. No consistent evidence of safety concerns was identified.Conclusions/significanceInfection prevention and control strategies should recommend vaccinating immunocompromised patients. Potential for bias and confounding and the presence of heterogeneity mean the evidence reviewed is generally weak, although the directions of effects are consistent. Areas for further research are identified.

Dataset Information

Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics.

Publications

Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets