title: What determines individuals' preferences for colorectal cancer screening programmes? A discrete choice experiment.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In many countries uptake of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening remains low.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To assess how procedural characteristics of CRC screening programmes determine preferences for participation and how individuals weigh these against the perceived benefits from participation in CRC screening.
  
  
  METHODS
  A discrete choice experiment was conducted among subjects in the age group of 50-75 years, including both screening-naïve subjects and participants of a CRC screening programme. Subjects were asked on their preferences for aspects of CRC screening programmes using scenarios based on pain, risk of complications, screening location, preparation, duration of procedure, screening interval and risk reduction of CRC-related death.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The response was 31% (156/500) for screening-naïve and 57% (124/210) for CRC screening participants. All aspects proved to significantly influence the respondents' preferences. For both groups combined, respondents required an additional relative risk reduction of CRC-related death by a screening programme of 1% for every additional 10 min of duration, 5% in order to expose themselves to a small risk of complications, 10% to accept mild pain, 10% to undergo preparation with an enema, 12% to use 0.75l of oral preparation combined with 12h fasting and 32% to use an extensive bowel preparation. Screening intervals shorter than 10 years were significantly preferred to a 10-year screening interval.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study shows that especially type of bowel preparation, risk reduction of CRC related death and length of screening interval influence CRC screening preferences. Furthermore, improving awareness on CRC mortality reduction by CRC screening may increase uptake.
authors.affiliation: Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Room Ba-393, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands. l.vandam.1@erasmusmc.nl
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: van Dam
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Hol
authors.forename: E W
authors.initials: EW
authors.lastname: de Bekker-Grob
authors.forename: E W
authors.initials: EW
authors.lastname: Steyerberg
authors.forename: E J
authors.initials: EJ
authors.lastname: Kuipers
authors.forename: J D F
authors.initials: JD
authors.lastname: Habbema
authors.forename: M L
authors.initials: ML
authors.lastname: Essink-Bot
authors.forename: M E
authors.initials: ME
authors.lastname: van Leerdam
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D001294:Attitude to Health; D002755:Choice Behavior; D015179:Colorectal Neoplasms / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000517:prevention & control; D003258:Consumer Behavior; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods / Q000523:psychology*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009426:Netherlands; D010146:Pain / Q000209:etiology / Q000523:psychology; D010342:Patient Acceptance of Health Care; D012923:Social Class; D013997:Time Factors