确定在关注癌症分子检测价值的研究中如何定义价值，以及在分子检测文献中应用拓宽医疗保健价值概念化的程度。乔安娜·布里格斯研究所 (JBI) 进行了范围界定审查） 指导。 Medline、Embase、EconLit 和 Cochrane Library 于 2023 年 8 月进行了检索。如果文章报告了与癌症分子检测的结果相关的成本、新成本或新结果，则这些文章符合资格。综合结果并使用演绎和归纳框架进行定性内容分析。该综述纳入了 91 篇文章。大多数（75/91）是传统的经济分析（比较经济评估和预算影响评估）并从医疗保健系统的角度进行（38/91）。临床结果主导价值评估 (61/91)，质量调整生命年 (QALY) 是最常见的结果衡量标准 (45/91)。其他价值定义多种多样（例如心理影响、参与试验的机会）、不一致，并且在很大程度上与不断发展的指导不相符。在关注癌症的分子检测文献中通常不描述更广泛的价值概念。衡量癌症分子检测的健康成本和结果的传统方法很流行，很少关注非临床价值要素。关于测试信息的非临床结果的报告不断涌现，特别是心理后果。测试过程的内在属性和接收测试信息的人的偏好可能会决定分子测试所实现的社会价值，并强调实施此类价值框架的挑战。© 2024。作者。

To identify how value is defined in studies that focus on the value of molecular testing in cancer and the extent to which broadening the conceptualisation of value in healthcare has been applied in the molecular testing literature.A scoping review was undertaken using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance. Medline, Embase, EconLit and Cochrane Library were searched in August 2023. Articles were eligible if they reported costs relative to outcomes, novel costs, or novel outcomes of molecular testing in cancer. Results were synthesised and qualitative content analysis was performed with deductive and inductive frameworks.Ninety-one articles were included in the review. The majority (75/91) were conventional economic analyses (comparative economic evaluations and budget impact assessments) and undertaken from a healthcare system perspective (38/91). Clinical outcomes dominate the assessment of value (61/91), with quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) the most common outcome measure (45/91). Other definitions of value were diverse (e.g. psychological impact, access to trials), inconsistent, and largely not in keeping with evolving guidance.Broader concepts of value were not commonly described in the molecular testing literature focusing on cancer. Conventional approaches to measuring the health costs and outcomes of molecular testing in cancer prevail with little focus on non-clinical elements of value. There are emerging reports of non-clinical outcomes of testing information, particularly psychological consequences. Intrinsic attributes of the testing process and preferences of those who receive testing information may determine the realised societal value of molecular testing and highlight challenges to implementing such a value framework.© 2024. The Author(s).