Preferences for Attributes of Initial COVID-19 Diagnosis in the United States and China During the Pandemic: Discrete Choice Experiment With Propensity Score Matching.

Publisher: JMIR Publications Country of Publication: Canada NLM ID: 101669345 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2369-2960 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 23692960 NLM ISO Abbreviation: JMIR Public Health Surveill Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: Toronto : JMIR Publications, [2015]-

COVID-19*/epidemiology ; Pandemics*/prevention & control; COVID-19 Testing ; China/epidemiology ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Humans ; Propensity Score ; SARS-CoV-2 ; United States/epidemiology

Background: China and the United States play critical leading roles in the global effort to contain the COVID-19 virus. Therefore, their population's preferences for initial diagnosis were compared to provide policy and clinical insights.
Objective: We aim to quantify and compare the public's preferences for medical management of fever and the attributes of initial diagnosis in the case of presenting symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in China and the United States.
Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study from January to March 2021 in China and the United States using an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk; in the United States) and recruited volunteers (in China). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match the 2 groups of respondents from China and the United States to minimize confounding effects. In addition, the respondents' preferences for different diagnosis options were evaluated using a mixed logit model (MXL) and latent class models (LCMs). Moreover, demographic data were collected and compared using the chi-square test, Fisher test, and Mann-Whitney U test.
Results: A total of 9112 respondents (5411, 59.4%, from China and 3701, 40.6%, from the United States) who completed our survey were included in our analysis. After PSM, 1240 (22.9%) respondents from China and 1240 (33.5%) from the United States were matched for sex, age, educational level, occupation, and annual salary levels. The segmented sizes of 3 classes of respondents from China were 870 (70.2%), 270 (21.8%), and 100 (8.0%), respectively. Meanwhile, the US respondents' segmented sizes were 269 (21.7%), 139 (11.2%), and 832 (67.1%), respectively. Respondents from China attached the greatest importance to the type of medical institution (weighted importance=40.0%), while those from the United States valued the waiting time (weighted importance=31.5%) the most. Respondents from China preferred the emergency department (coefficient=0.973, reference level: online consultation) and fever clinic (a special clinic for the treatment of fever patients for the prevention and control of acute infectious diseases in China; coefficient=0.974, reference level: online consultation), while those from the United States preferred private clinics (general practices; coefficient=0.543, reference level: online consultation). Additionally, shorter waiting times, COVID-19 nucleic acid testing arrangements, higher reimbursement rates, and lower costs were always preferred.
Conclusions: Improvements in the availability of COVID-19 testing and medical professional skills and increased designated health care facilities may help boost potential health care seeking during COVID-19 and prevent unrecognized community spreading of SARS-CoV-2 in China and the United States. Moreover, to better prevent future waves of pandemics, identify undiagnosed patients, and encourage those undiagnosed to seek health care services to curb the pandemic, the hierarchical diagnosis and treatment system needs improvement in China, and the United States should focus on reducing diagnosis costs and raising the reimbursement rate of medical insurance.
(©Yimin Zhang, Taoran Liu, Zonglin He, Sze Ngai Chan, Babatunde Akinwunmi, Jian Huang, Tak-Hap Wong, Casper J P Zhang, Wai-Kit Ming. Originally published in JMIR Public Health and Surveillance (https://publichealth.jmir.org), 16.08.2022.)

Pharmacoeconomics. 2019 Feb;37(2):201-226. (PMID: 30392040)
Psychol Methods. 2012 Jun;17(2):228-43. (PMID: 22309957)
Nat Rev Genet. 2021 Jul;22(7):415-426. (PMID: 33948037)
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021 Sep;19(5):709-719. (PMID: 34312818)
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2020 Nov;26(11):1450-1452. (PMID: 32777361)
Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2021 May;15(3):407-412. (PMID: 33128444)
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Oct 15;22(10):e22910. (PMID: 33001838)
Patient. 2015 Oct;8(5):373-84. (PMID: 25726010)
Health Syst Transit. 2013;15(3):1-431. (PMID: 24025796)
Lancet Glob Health. 2015 Aug;3(8):e445-e446. (PMID: 26187488)
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2020 Jul 1;27(7):1067-1071. (PMID: 32524147)
J Med Virol. 2020 Apr;92(4):441-447. (PMID: 31994742)
Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Jun 14;9(6):. (PMID: 34198716)
Patient. 2008 Dec 1;1(4):317-30. (PMID: 22272999)
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Sep 1;151(5):345-9. (PMID: 19721022)
N Engl J Med. 2020 Jul 23;383(4):299-302. (PMID: 32412704)
Int J Public Health. 2021 Mar 19;66:591027. (PMID: 34744560)
Health Econ. 2009 Dec;18(12):1420-39. (PMID: 19191268)
JAMA Pediatr. 2021 Apr 1;175(4):345-346. (PMID: 33284346)
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Feb 28;69(8):216-219. (PMID: 32106216)
N Engl J Med. 2020 Feb 20;382(8):727-733. (PMID: 31978945)
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jun 11;18(12):. (PMID: 34208194)
Qual Health Res. 2007 Oct;17(8):1006-19. (PMID: 17928475)
Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2013 Sep;15(9):804-8. (PMID: 24616790)
N Engl J Med. 2020 Aug 27;383(9):885-886. (PMID: 32530584)
Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Oct;76(4):459-461. (PMID: 32747081)
JAMA. 2020 May 19;323(19):1908-1909. (PMID: 32275299)
Health Econ. 2005 Jul;14(7):687-701. (PMID: 15619273)
Value Health. 2019 Feb;22(2):157-160. (PMID: 30711059)
Am J Health Promot. 2022 Jan;36(1):185-189. (PMID: 34284644)
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 23;9(4):e90635. (PMID: 24759637)
Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2020 Dec;18(12):1201-1211. (PMID: 32749914)
Int J Med Inform. 2021 Jun;150:104465. (PMID: 33887589)
Assessment. 2019 Jul;26(5):759-766. (PMID: 29490470)
J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Aug;35(8):2296-2303. (PMID: 32472486)
Clin Infect Dis. 2022 Aug 24;75(1):e216-e223. (PMID: 34718464)
N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8;383(15):1483-1488. (PMID: 32706956)
Front Public Health. 2020 Dec 17;8:599862. (PMID: 33392138)
Health Expect. 2007 Mar;10(1):30-45. (PMID: 17324193)
Value Health. 2021 Apr;24(4):575-584. (PMID: 33840436)
J Med Internet Res. 2020 Aug 6;22(8):e19678. (PMID: 32716892)
Nat Med. 2021 May;27(5):740-742. (PMID: 33859409)
PLoS One. 2021 Nov 1;16(11):e0258945. (PMID: 34723981)
Lancet. 2020 Feb 15;395(10223):497-506. (PMID: 31986264)
Health Psychol Rev. 2021 Jun;15(2):314-332. (PMID: 31937184)
J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2022 Jul-Aug;51(4):428-442. (PMID: 33448875)
Behav Res Methods. 2016 Mar;48(1):400-7. (PMID: 25761395)
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2016;12:53-81. (PMID: 26772208)
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2020 Aug;8(1):. (PMID: 32847843)
BMJ Glob Health. 2018 Sep 19;3(5):e000854. (PMID: 30258653)
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2017 Dec;17(6):531-542. (PMID: 29058478)
Heliyon. 2021 Sep;7(9):e07972. (PMID: 34541362)
JAMA. 2020 May 19;323(19):1915-1923. (PMID: 32275295)
Ann Emerg Med. 2020 Nov;76(5):595-601. (PMID: 33008651)

Keywords: COVID-19; discrete choice experiment; patient preference; patients with fever; propensity score matching; public health

Date Created: 20220627 Date Completed: 20220818 Latest Revision: 20220930

20240628

PMC9384860

10.2196/37422

35759683