Literature DB >> 19267358

Who pays attention in stated-choice surveys?

Semra Ozdemir1, Ateesha F Mohamed, F Reed Johnson, A Brett Hauber.   

Abstract

Responses of inattentive or inconsistent subjects in stated-choice (SC) surveys can lead to imprecise or biased estimates. Several SC studies have investigated inconsistency and most of these studies dropped subjects who were inconsistent. However, none of these studies reported who is more likely to fail consistency tests. We investigated the effect of the personal characteristics and task complexity on preference inconsistency in eight different SC surveys. We found that white, higher-income and better-educated female subjects were less likely to fail consistency tests. Understanding the characteristics of subjects who are inattentive to the choice task may help in designing and pre-testing instruments that work effectively for a wider range of subjects.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19267358     DOI: 10.1002/hec.1452

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


  9 in total

1.  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

2.  A closer look at decision and analyst error by including nonlinearities in discrete choice models: implications on willingness-to-pay estimates derived from discrete choice data in healthcare.

Authors:  Esther W de Bekker-Grob; John M Rose; Michiel C J Bliemer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Patient Medication Preferences for Managing Dry Eye Disease: The Importance of Medication Side Effects.

Authors:  Semra Ozdemir; Sharon Wan Jie Yeo; Jia Jia Lee; Adithya Bhaskar; Eric Finkelstein; Louis Tong
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 3.481

4.  Parents' views on their children's use of eye drops and willingness to accept a new sustained-release subconjunctival injection.

Authors:  Semra Ozdemir; Hong King Wu; Eric A Finkelstein; Tina T Wong
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-10-25

5.  Preferences for centralised emergency medical services: discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Nawaraj Bhattarai; Peter Mcmeekin; Christopher I Price; Luke Vale
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Do people have differing motivations for participating in a stated-preference study? Results from a latent-class analysis.

Authors:  Ilene L Hollin; Ellen Janssen; Marcella A Kelley; John F P Bridges
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2021-02-06       Impact factor: 2.796

7.  Understanding patient preferences in anti-VEGF treatment options for age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Semra Ozdemir; Eric Finkelstein; Jia Jia Lee; Issac Horng Khit Too; Kelvin Yi Chong Teo; Anna Chen Sim Tan; Tien Yin Wong; Gemmy Chui Ming Cheung
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-11       Impact factor: 3.752

8.  Patients' & healthcare professionals' values regarding true- & false-positive diagnosis when colorectal cancer screening by CT colonography: discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Darren Boone; Susan Mallett; Shihua Zhu; Guiqing Lily Yao; Nichola Bell; Alex Ghanouni; Christian von Wagner; Stuart A Taylor; Douglas G Altman; Richard Lilford; Steve Halligan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-09       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Exploring how individuals complete the choice tasks in a discrete choice experiment: an interview study.

Authors:  Jorien Veldwijk; Domino Determann; Mattijs S Lambooij; Janine A van Til; Ida J Korfage; Esther W de Bekker-Grob; G Ardine de Wit
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 4.615

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.