Literature DB >> 12652516

Revisiting the axiom of completeness in health care.

Mandy Ryan1, Fernando San Miguel.   

Abstract

Experiments concerned with modelling individual preferences are based on the assumption of completeness i.e. it is assumed that individuals have well-defined preferences for any choice they are presented with. However, this may not be the case for goods such as health care, where individuals are not used to making choices. If this assumption is violated, the large body of experimental economic literature eliciting patient preferences in health care may be challenged. This paper reports the results of a discrete choice experiment carried out to examine the assumption of complete preferences within health care. The tests carried out are based on the comparison of preferences for three different goods for which different levels of formed preferences are expected: a supermarket; dentist consultation and bowel cancer screening. The results do not provide sufficient evidence to support this hypothesis. However, further research is required before these results are generalised. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12652516     DOI: 10.1002/hec.730

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  6 in total

1.  Validity and Reliability of Willingness-to-Pay Estimates: Evidence from Two Overlapping Discrete-Choice Experiments.

Authors:  Harry Telser; Karolin Becker; Peter Zweifel
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  On the meaningfulness of testing preference axioms in stated preference discrete choice experiments.

Authors:  Jens Leth Hougaard; Tue Tjur; Lars Peter Osterdal
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2011-05-05

3.  Discrete Choice Experiments: A Guide to Model Specification, Estimation and Software.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Denzil G Fiebig; Arne Risa Hole
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jordan Louviere
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  What patients want from primary care consultations: a discrete choice experiment to identify patients' priorities.

Authors:  Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi; Arne Risa Hole; Nicola Mead; Ruth McDonald; Diane Whalley; Peter Bower; Martin Roland
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2008 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

6.  Impact of discussion on preferences elicited in a group setting.

Authors:  Ken Stein; Julie Ratcliffe; Ali Round; Ruairidh Milne; John E Brazier
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2006-03-29       Impact factor: 3.186

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.