Author
Listed:
- Jose A. Robles-Zurita
(Department of Applied Economics (Statistics and Econometrics), University of Málaga, Málaga, Spain
Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK)
- Neil Hawkins
(Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK)
- Janet Bouttell
(Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
Centre for Healthcare Equipment and Technology Adoption, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK)
Abstract
Background We aimed to illustrate that health economists should consider individual heterogeneity when solving the problem of finding the optimal combination of sensitivity and specificity that maximizes the average health utility of a target population in a screening program. Methods A theoretical framework compares the solution under standard economics of diagnoses to the optimal combination under an endogenous uptake analysis, where screening participation is given by heterogenous health preferences. An applied example used calibrated parameters with real data from the bowel cancer screening program in the United Kingdom. Scenario analyses show how the results would change with parameter values, if disease risk and health utilities were not independent and if screening uptake were not completely determined by health preferences. Results A general theoretical result states that the endogenous uptake analysis leads to a weakly higher true- and false-positive rate than would be optimal under the standard approach. In the same way, the endogenous solution would lead to a lower uptake rate. The base-case scenario of the applied example illustrates that a screening program using the endogenous solution would generate 21.1% more quality-adjusted life-years than when using the standard solution. The scenario analyses show when the endogenous analysis is most valued and that the general result applies for a wide range of situations when theoretical assumptions are relaxed. Limitations The results obtained are valid under the assumptions made. Analysts should evaluate if those could hold in the applied screening context. Conclusions Individual heterogeneity and uptake decisions are relevant factors to consider in the problem of finding an optimal combination of sensitivity and specificity for a screening test. Highlights The value of screening programs can be higher if heterogeneity of preferences in the target population is considered. The optimal operation of a screening test depends on health utilities of the target population and on the heterogeneity of these health utilities. Under heterogeneity of health utilities, the optimal operation of a screening test does not maximize screening uptake. A general theoretical result states that the endogenous uptake analysis leads to a weakly higher true- and false-positive rate than would be optimal under a standard approach; this is true for a wide range of situations.
Suggested Citation
Jose A. Robles-Zurita & Neil Hawkins & Janet Bouttell, 2025.
"Leveling up: Treating Uptake as Endogenous May Increase the Value of Screening Programs,"
Medical Decision Making, , vol. 45(3), pages 318-331, April.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:medema:v:45:y:2025:i:3:p:318-331
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X251319794
Download full text from publisher
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:3:p:318-331. 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.