What are GPs' preferences for financial and non-financial incentives in cancer screening? Evidence for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers

Jonathan Sicsic, Nicolas Krucien and Carine Franc

Social Science & Medicine, 2016, vol. 167, issue C, 116-127

Abstract: General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in the delivery of preventive and screening services for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. In practice, GPs' involvement varies considerably across types of cancer and among GPs, raising important questions about the determinants of GPs' implication in screening activities: what is the relative impact of financial and non-financial incentives? Are GPs' preferences for financial and non-financial incentives cancer-specific? Is there preference heterogeneity and how much does it differ according to the screening context? This study investigates the determinants of GPs' involvement in cancer screening activities using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology. A representative sample of 402 GPs' was recruited in France between March and April 2014. Marginal rates of substitution were used to compare GPs' preferences for being involved in screening activities across three types of cancers: breast, cervical, and colorectal. Variability of preferences was investigated using Hierarchical Bayes mixed logit models. The results indicate that GPs are sensitive to both financial and non-financial incentives, such as a compensated training and systematic transmission of information about screened patients, aimed to facilitate communication between doctors and patients. There is also evidence that the level and variability of preferences differ across screening contexts, although the variations are not statistically significant on average. GPs appear to be relatively more sensitive to financial incentives for being involved in colorectal cancer screening, whereas they have higher and more heterogeneous preferences for non-financial incentives in breast and cervical cancers. Our study provides new findings for policymakers interested in prioritizing levers to increase the supply of cancer screening services in general practice.

Keywords: France; Cancer screening; Discrete choice experiment; Economic incentives; Hierarchical bayes; Mixed logit; Preference heterogeneity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953616304865
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:167:y:2016:i:c:p:116-127

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01

DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.08.050

Access Statistics for this article

Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian

More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu (repec@elsevier.com).