OBJECTIVES: To develop a choice task for eliciting priorities in the face of competing cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes, medication-related symptoms, and fall injuries. DESIGN: Conjoint analysis. SETTING: Senior housing site. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 15 senior housing residents for the pretest, 13 residents for the pilot test. MEASUREMENTS: The final task included 11 sets of choices. In each, one option optimized the risk of one or two of the three outcomes at the expense of the other(s); the second option did the reverse. Relative importance scores for CVD, fall injury, and medication-symptom outcomes were calculated. Reliability was assessed for two administrations using intraclass correlations (ICCs). Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to evaluate order effects. RESULTS: The ICCs between choice task administrations were 0.70 for fall injuries, 0.73 for medication symptoms, and 0.56 for CVD outcomes. The ICCs with removal of two outliers were 0.84, 0.72, and 0.84, respectively. Whether CVD or fall injuries appeared first had no effect on scores. CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence of comprehensibility and reliability supports using the choice task to determine whether individuals' priorities differ in the face of competing outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To develop a choice task for eliciting priorities in the face of competing cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes, medication-related symptoms, and fall injuries. DESIGN: Conjoint analysis. SETTING: Senior housing site. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 15 senior housing residents for the pretest, 13 residents for the pilot test. MEASUREMENTS: The final task included 11 sets of choices. In each, one option optimized the risk of one or two of the three outcomes at the expense of the other(s); the second option did the reverse. Relative importance scores for CVD, fall injury, and medication-symptom outcomes were calculated. Reliability was assessed for two administrations using intraclass correlations (ICCs). Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to evaluate order effects. RESULTS: The ICCs between choice task administrations were 0.70 for fall injuries, 0.73 for medication symptoms, and 0.56 for CVD outcomes. The ICCs with removal of two outliers were 0.84, 0.72, and 0.84, respectively. Whether CVD or fall injuries appeared first had no effect on scores. CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence of comprehensibility and reliability supports using the choice task to determine whether individuals' priorities differ in the face of competing outcomes.
Authors: Jerry H Gurwitz; Terry S Field; Leslie R Harrold; Jeffrey Rothschild; Kristin Debellis; Andrew C Seger; Cynthia Cadoret; Leslie S Fish; Lawrence Garber; Michael Kelleher; David W Bates Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-03-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: K F Cook; C M Ashton; M M Byrne; B Brody; J Geraci; R B Giesler; M Hanita; J Souchek; N P Wray Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2001-11 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Joseph V Agostini; Mary E Tinetti; Ling Han; Peter Peduzzi; Joanne M Foody; John Concato Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2007-09-25 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Mary E Tinetti; Gail J McAvay; Terri R Fried; Heather G Allore; Joanna C Salmon; Joanne M Foody; Luann Bianco; Sandra Ginter; Liana Fraenkel Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2008-07-24 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Annette Eidam; Anja Roth; Eduard Frick; Michael Metzner; Anette Lampert; Hanna M Seidling; Walter E Haefeli; Jürgen M Bauer Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2022-07-23 Impact factor: 2.314
Authors: Annette Eidam; Anja Roth; André Lacroix; Sabine Goisser; Hanna M Seidling; Walter E Haefeli; Jürgen M Bauer Journal: Patient Prefer Adherence Date: 2020-03-04 Impact factor: 2.711