Diagnostics (May 2021)

Value Attribution in the Decision to Use of Whole Body MRI for Early Cancer Diagnosis

  • Derna Busacchio,
  • Ketti Mazzocco,
  • Davide Radice,
  • Paul E. Summers,
  • Paola Pricolo,
  • Gabriella Pravettoni,
  • Giuseppe Petralia

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11060972
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 6
p. 972

Abstract

Read online

This study aimed to identify the main factors that asymptomatic individuals considered when deciding to undergo self-referred Whole-body MRI (WB-MRI) for early cancer diagnosis and the subjective values attributed to each mentioned factor in a Decision tree analysis. Personal characteristics such as risk perception and personality were investigated as possible factors affecting value attribution. Seventy-four volunteers (mean age 56.4; male = 47) filled a simplified decision tree by expressing the expected factors and related subjective values associated with two screening options for early cancer diagnosis (standard procedures vs. WB-MRI+standard procedures) while waiting for a WB-MRI examination. Questionnaires on risk perception and personality traits were also administered. Expected factors were summarized in 5 clusters: diagnostic certainty, psychological well-being, safety, test validity and time/cost. Test validity and time/cost were evaluated as potential losses in both procedures. Diagnostic Certainty and safety were evaluated as losses in standard screening, and as an advantage when considering WB-MRI+standard screening. Forty-five percent of participants considered WB-MRI+standard screening as beneficial for their psychological well-being. Finally, personal absolute and comparative risk to get cancer was associated with a positive value attribution to WB-MRI (p < 0.05). Our results showed the addition of WB-MRI to be generally considered a good option to increase individuals’ perceptions of diagnostic certainty and the safety of the exam, and to increase psychological well-being. The positive value of such a screening option increased with the individual’s cancer risk perception.

Keywords