IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v45y2025i2p168-176.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changes in Risk Tolerance for Ovarian Cancer Prevention Strategies during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Brian L. Egleston

    (Fox Chase Cancer Center, Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA)

  • Mary B. Daly

    (Fox Chase Cancer Center, Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA)

  • Kaitlyn Lew

    (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Lisa Bealin

    (Fox Chase Cancer Center, Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA)

  • Alexander D. Husband

    (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Jill E. Stopfer

    (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Pawel Przybysz

    (Fox Chase Cancer Center, Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA)

  • Olga Tchuvatkina

    (Fox Chase Cancer Center, Temple University Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA)

  • Yu-Ning Wong

    (Section of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
    Division of Hematology-Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, USA)

  • Judy E. Garber

    (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA)

  • Timothy R. Rebbeck

    (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA
    TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA)

Abstract

Background Prior to COVID-19, little was known about how risks associated with such a pandemic would compete with and influence patient decision making regarding cancer risk reducing medical decision making. We investigated how the pandemic affected preferences for medical risk-reducing strategies among women at elevated risk of breast or ovarian cancer. Methods We conducted a discrete choice experiment. Women about to undergo genetic testing and counseling at 2 medical centers participated. Enrollment occurred between 2019 and 2022, allowing us to investigate changes in preferences from before the pandemic to after the pandemic. Women chose from permuted scenarios that specified type of surgery, age of menopause, quality of menopausal symptoms, and risk of ovarian cancer, heart disease, or osteoporosis. Results A total of 355 women, with a median age of 36 y, participated. In 2019, women were less likely to choose prevention scenarios with higher ovarian cancer risk (odds ratio [OR] = 0.42 per 10-point increase in risk, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22–0.61). In June 2020, the effect of higher ovarian cancer risk scenarios on choice was attenuated (OR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.68–1.04), with the effect becoming more salient again by July 2021 (OR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.52–0.67) ( P  = 0.039 for test of temporal interaction). No other attribute demonstrated a temporal trend. Conclusion The risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic may have attenuated the impact of risk of ovarian cancer on choice of risk-reducing prevention strategies for ovarian cancer. The maximum attenuation occurred at the beginning of the pandemic when access to risk-reducing surgery was most restricted. Our findings highlight how individuals evaluate competing health risks and adjust their uptake of cancer prevention strategies when faced with a future pandemic or similar global crisis. Highlights In this discrete choice experiment, women were much less likely to choose prevention scenarios that had higher ovarian cancer risk prior to the COVID-19 pandemic than after the pandemic. The attenuation of preferences may have persisted through 2022. COVID-19 may have altered the relative importance of factors that motivate women to undergo risk-reducing surgeries.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian L. Egleston & Mary B. Daly & Kaitlyn Lew & Lisa Bealin & Alexander D. Husband & Jill E. Stopfer & Pawel Przybysz & Olga Tchuvatkina & Yu-Ning Wong & Judy E. Garber & Timothy R. Rebbeck, 2025. "Changes in Risk Tolerance for Ovarian Cancer Prevention Strategies during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 45(2), pages 168-176, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:45:y:2025:i:2:p:168-176
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X241302829
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X241302829
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X241302829?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:45:y:2025:i:2:p:168-176. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.