Literature DB >> 17478438

Making sense of patient priorities: applying discrete choice methods in primary care using 'think aloud' technique.

Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi1, Peter Bower, Nicola Mead, Ruth McDonald, Diane Whalley, Martin Roland.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Delivering effective health care within limited budgets requires an understanding of patient priorities. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) provide patients with choices, where each choice differs in terms of certain attributes (such as waiting times, quality of care). Although this technique has significant potential in examining priorities, its use raises practical and conceptual issues. This paper describes the development of a DCE evaluating patient priorities in primary care.
METHODS: Twenty patients completed a DCE using a 'think aloud' protocol, where they verbalized their thinking while making choices. The analysis examined their decision-making processes.
RESULTS: There was evidence that patients reinterpreted some attributes, and related some to others outside the task. The cost attribute was interpreted in a variety of ways, dominating some patients' decision-making, being seen as irrelevant by others and being interpreted appropriately by some. The deree to which patients exhibited trading in line with theoretical assumptions also varied. Some choices in the hypothetical task were restricted by their previous experience, but more frequently patients tested the boundaries of the task in ways which directly reflected the primary care context.
CONCLUSION: Patient interpretation of the discrete choice task was varied and some went beyond the formal boundaries of the task to make their choices. This highlights the importance of piloting attributes, providing clear instructions about the task and developing models of patient decision-making so that responses can be interpreted correctly.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17478438     DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmm007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Pract        ISSN: 0263-2136            Impact factor:   2.267


  16 in total

Review 1.  Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: a systematic review.

Authors:  Caroline Vass; Ewan Gray; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2016-06

2.  Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) Questionnaire to Understand Veterans' Preferences for Tobacco Treatment in Primary Care.

Authors:  David A Katz; Kenda R Stewart; Monica Paez; Mark W Vander Weg; Kathleen M Grant; Christine Hamlin; Gary Gaeth
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  "I Was Trying to Do the Maths": Exploring the Impact of Risk Communication in Discrete Choice Experiments.

Authors:  Caroline Vass; Dan Rigby; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 4.  Opening the 'Black Box': An Overview of Methods to Investigate the Decision-Making Process in Choice-Based Surveys.

Authors:  Dan Rigby; Caroline Vass; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 3.883

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.  Willingness to participate in a lifestyle intervention program of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a conjoint analysis.

Authors:  Paul F van Gils; Mattijs S Lambooij; Marloes Hw Flanderijn; Matthijs van den Berg; G Ardine de Wit; Albertine J Schuit; Jeroen N Struijs; B van den Berg
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 2.711

7.  A think aloud study comparing the validity and acceptability of discrete choice and best worst scaling methods.

Authors:  Jennifer A Whitty; Ruth Walker; Xanthe Golenko; Julie Ratcliffe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The effect of including an opt-out option in discrete choice experiments.

Authors:  Jorien Veldwijk; Mattijs S Lambooij; Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Henriëtte A Smit; G Ardine de Wit
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  What determines patient preferences for treating low risk basal cell carcinoma when comparing surgery vs imiquimod? A discrete choice experiment survey from the SINS trial.

Authors:  Michela Tinelli; Mara Ozolins; Fiona Bath-Hextall; Hywel C Williams
Journal:  BMC Dermatol       Date:  2012-10-04

10.  Bristol girls dance project feasibility study: using a pilot economic evaluation to inform design of a full trial.

Authors:  Jane E Powell; Fran E Carroll; Simon J Sebire; Anne M Haase; Russell Jago
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.