Objectives: This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence from discrete choice experiments to explore the preferences of patients, physicians, and caregivers regarding lung cancer treatment. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted utilizing the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases, encompassing publications up to 12 July 2024. We included published discrete choice experiment (DCE) studies that assessed preferences for lung cancer treatment among patients, physicians, or caregivers, with no restrictions on country, language, publication date, or disease stage. Two researchers independently conducted the literature screening and data extraction. The included studies were assessed for quality using the PREFS checklist. Results: Among the 1086 studies identified, 18 studies met the eligibility criteria. A total of 115 attributes were extracted and categorized into three main categories: outcome, process, and cost, with subcategories under each. Regarding the relative importance of attributes, heterogeneity was observed among stakeholders. The PREFS scores of the 18 included studies, with an average score of 3.8, reflect the high overall quality of these studies. Conclusions: This review revealed both commonalities and differences in lung cancer treatment preferences among patients, physicians, and caregivers. However, existing studies have certain limitations in the coverage of study populations, the scope of attributes, and the research design of the experiments.
Wang et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: