Literature DB >> 20382460

Using discrete choice experiments to understand preferences for quality of life. Variance-scale heterogeneity matters.

Terry Nicholas Flynn1, Jordan J Louviere2, Tim J Peters3, Joanna Coast4.   

Abstract

Health services researchers are increasingly using discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to model a latent variable, be it health, health-related quality of life or utility. Unfortunately it is not widely recognised that failure to model variance heterogeneity correctly leads to bias in the point estimates. This paper compares variance heterogeneity latent class models with traditional multinomial logistic (MNL) regression models. Using the ICECAP-O quality of life instrument which was designed to provide a set of preference-based general quality of life tariffs for the UK population aged 65+, it demonstrates that there is both mean and variance heterogeneity in preferences for quality of life, which covariate-adjusted MNL is incapable of separating. Two policy-relevant mean groups were found: one group that particularly disliked impairments to independence was dominated by females living alone (typically widows). Males who live alone (often widowers) did not display a preference for independence, but instead showed a strong aversion to social isolation, as did older people (of either sex) who lived with a spouse. Approximately 6-10% of respondents can be classified into a third group that often misunderstood the task. Having a qualification of any type and higher quality of life was associated with smaller random component variances. This illustrates how better understanding of random utility theory enables richer inferences to be drawn from discrete choice experiments. The methods have relevance for all health studies using discrete choice tasks to make inferences about a latent scale, particular QALY valuation exercises that use DCEs, best-worst scaling and ranking tasks. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20382460     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.03.008

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


  24 in total

1.  Using best-worst scaling choice experiments to measure public perceptions and preferences for healthcare reform in australia.

Authors:  Jordan J Louviere; Terry N Flynn
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Using conjoint analysis and choice experiments to estimate QALY values: issues to consider.

Authors:  Terry N Flynn
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  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

4.  Exploring variation in parental worries about HPV vaccination: a latent-class analysis.

Authors:  Melissa B Gilkey; Divya Mohan; Ellen M Janssen; Annie-Laurie McRee; Melanie L Kornides; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Measuring and valuing quality of life for public health research: application of the ICECAP-O capability index in the Australian general population.

Authors:  L Couzner; J Ratcliffe; L Lester; T Flynn; M Crotty
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2012-09-08       Impact factor: 3.380

6.  Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare Discrete Choice Experiments: A Primer.

Authors:  Caroline M Vass; Stuart Wright; Michael Burton; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Using Latent Class Analysis to Model Preference Heterogeneity in Health: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Mo Zhou; Winter Maxwell Thayer; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  US valuation of the SF-6D.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig; A Simon Pickard; Elly Stolk; John E Brazier
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-04-29       Impact factor: 2.583

9.  Developing adolescent-specific health state values for economic evaluation: an application of profile case best-worst scaling to the Child Health Utility 9D.

Authors:  Julie Ratcliffe; Terry Flynn; Frances Terlich; Katherine Stevens; John Brazier; Michael Sawyer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 10.  Acknowledging patient heterogeneity in economic evaluation : a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Janneke P C Grutters; Mark Sculpher; Andrew H Briggs; Johan L Severens; Math J Candel; James E Stahl; Dirk De Ruysscher; Albert Boer; Bram L T Ramaekers; Manuela A Joore
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.