Do You Want to Hear the Bad News? The Value of Diagnostic Tests for Alzheimer's Disease.
Repository Usage Stats
OBJECTIVE: The diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains difficult. Lack of diagnostic certainty or possible distress related to a positive result from diagnostic testing could limit the application of new testing technologies. The objective of this paper is to quantify respondents' preferences for obtaining AD diagnostic tests and to estimate the perceived value of AD test information. METHODS: Discrete-choice experiment and contingent-valuation questions were administered to respondents in Germany and the United Kingdom. Choice data were analyzed by using random-parameters logit. A probit model characterized respondents who were not willing to take a test. RESULTS: Most respondents indicated a positive value for AD diagnostic test information. Respondents who indicated an interest in testing preferred brain imaging without the use of radioactive markers. German respondents had relatively lower money-equivalent values for test features compared with respondents in the United Kingdom. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents preferred less invasive diagnostic procedures and tests with higher accuracy and expressed a willingness to pay up to €700 to receive a less invasive test with the highest accuracy.
SubjectAlzheimer’s disease (AD)
diagnostic test information
discrete-choice experiment (DCE)
money-equivalent value (MEV)
Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures
Published Version (Please cite this version)10.1016/j.jval.2015.10.011
Publication InfoMühlbacher, Axel; Johnson, F Reed; Yang, Jui-Chen; Happich, Michael; & Belger, Mark (2016). Do You Want to Hear the Bad News? The Value of Diagnostic Tests for Alzheimer's Disease. Value Health, 19(1). pp. 66-74. 10.1016/j.jval.2015.10.011. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/11717.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
More InfoShow full item record
Professor in Population Health Sciences
F. Reed Johnson, PhD, has more than 40 years of academic and research experience in health and environmental economics. He has served on the faculties of several universities in the United States, Canada, and Sweden, and as Distinguished Fellow at Research Triangle Institute. He currently is Senior Research Scholar in the Duke Clinical Research Institute. As a staff member in the US Environmental Protection Agency’s environmental economics research program during the 1980s, Reed helped