ArticleBMC health services research2026
Patient preferences for managing chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema in China: evidence from a discrete choice experiment.
Article in BMC health services research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (cBCRL) is a lifelong risk for breast cancer survivors. Management strategies for this condition involve trade-offs across various attributes. We aimed to identify the preferences of breast cancer survivors in China for cBCRL management strategies using a discrete choice experiment (DCE).
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional DCE among patients with cBCRL in Shanxi Province, China, from December 2023 to October 2025. The DCE included five attributes: treatment method (non-surgical, surgical, mixed), lymphedema volume reduction (≤ 20%, 40%, ≥ 60%), functional improvement in the affected area (≤ 30%, 30-70%, > 70%), probability of adverse event (low, medium, high), and out-of-pocket cost per treatment course (ranging from 200 to 800 CNY). Preferences were estimated using a multinomial logit model, and heterogeneity was analyzed using latent class models and subgroup analysis.
resultsA total of 446 participants, who completed the survey and passed the data quality control, were included in the final analyses. The majority of them were aged 25-44 years old, held a university degree or above, and resided in urban areas. Respondents valued cost (relative importance: 53.9%) the most, followed by functional improvement (14.5%). Additionally, the results showed that participants preferred non-surgical management over surgical treatment (β = 0.152, 95% CI 0.099-0.205; p < 0.001). LCM identified three distinct preference groups, in which the first group preferred the cost most (30.0%), the second group valued balanced cost and clinical benefits (58.6%), and the third group focused on treatment method and function (11.3%).
conclusionThis study suggests that patients with cBCRL place the greatest importance on treatment cost, followed by functional improvement and treatment method. Incorporating patient preferences into survivorship care through affordable, function-oriented, and patient-centred management strategies may help improve the alignment of care with patients' values and priorities. However, because these findings reflect stated preferences under hypothetical scenarios, the real-world effects of reducing out-of-pocket costs on treatment uptake, adherence, and clinical outcomes require further study.
trial registrationNot applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.