Literature DB >> 10622695

Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments.

S Farrar1, M Ryan, D Ross, A Ludbrook.   

Abstract

Limited resources for health care means that techniques are required to aid the process of priority setting. This paper represents one of the first attempts to use discrete choice modelling (DCM) within the area of priority setting. It is shown how the technique can be used to estimate cost per unit of benefit ratios for competing clinical service developments. Integer programming is proposed as a method to be used, alongside DCM, to help policy makers select the optimal combination of clinical service developments within a given budget. The technique is also shown to be internally valid and internally consistent. It is argued that DCM is a potentially useful technique to be used within the area of priority setting more generally. However, further work is required to address methodological issues around the technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10622695     DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(99)00268-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  25 in total

1.  Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care.

Authors:  M Ryan; S Farrar
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-03

Review 2.  Eliciting reasons: empirical methods in priority setting.

Authors:  Andreas Hasman
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2003-03

3.  Discrete choice experiments in health care.

Authors:  Mandy Ryan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-02-14

4.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics. For better or for worse?

Authors:  Stirling Bryan; Paul Dolan
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2004-10

5.  Predicting Negative Events: Using Post-discharge Data to Detect High-Risk Patients.

Authors:  Lina Sulieman; Daniel Fabbri; Fei Wang; Jianying Hu; Bradley A Malin
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2017-02-10

6.  To fund or not to fund: development of a decision-making framework for the coverage of new health technologies.

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Christopher McCabe; Donald J Philippon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  A stated preference binary choice experiment to explore NICE decision making.

Authors:  Paul Tappenden; John Brazier; Julie Ratcliffe; James Chilcott
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Priority setting in the Provincial Health Services Authority: case study for the 2005/06 planning cycle.

Authors:  Craig Mitton; Jennifer Mackenzie; Lynda Cranston; Flora Teng
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2006-07

9.  Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: an approach for clinicians: American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older Adults with Multimorbidity.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 5.562

10.  Preferences of GPs and patients for preventive osteoporosis drug treatment: a discrete-choice experiment.

Authors:  Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Marie-Louise Essink-Bot; Willem Jan Meerding; Bart W Koes; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.