Literature DB >> 22272997

Survey-design and analytical strategies for better healthcare stated-choice studies.

F Reed Johnson1, Carol Mansfield.   

Abstract

Stated-choice (SC) surveys, such as conjoint analysis, present some interesting problems for researchers that are not addressed in the traditional survey-development literature. While the constraints imposed by preference theory, the experimental design of the choice sets, and the statistical methods used to analyze choice data all pose challenges for researchers new to SC methods, they also direct such researchers towards techniques that are not possible with more traditional survey methods. In this article, we focus on issues of preference heterogeneity (variation in preferences across subjects by observable and non-observable co-variates) and attribute dominance to illustrate the synergistic roles that survey-design and analytical strategies play in SC research. In this article, we show how advanced analytical techniques are likely to be more important than survey-design solutions when addressing preference heterogeneity. Good practice supports the use of mixed-logit and similar modeling approaches to mitigate the problem of unobserved preference or variance heterogeneity. However, if the sample size is not large enough or the survey instrument does not contain questions about important subject characteristics, then the source of heterogeneity cannot be identified and the problems caused by heterogeneity will be magnified.In contrast, minimizing attribute dominance and testing for attribute dominance relies on careful survey design, rather than more complex analysis. In general, survey design needs careful attention from researchers. No amount of complex analysis can compensate for a poor survey design that can generate only flawed SC data.

Year:  2008        PMID: 22272997     DOI: 10.2165/1312067-200801040-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient        ISSN: 1178-1653            Impact factor:   3.883


  3 in total

1.  Factors that affect adherence to bipolar disorder treatments: a stated-preference approach.

Authors:  F Reed Johnson; Semra Ozdemir; Ranjani Manjunath; A Brett Hauber; Steven P Burch; Thomas R Thompson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Crohn's disease patients' risk-benefit preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy.

Authors:  F Reed Johnson; Semra Ozdemir; Carol Mansfield; Steven Hass; David W Miller; Corey A Siegel; Bruce E Sands
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2007-05-03       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  Several methods to investigate relative attribute impact in stated preference experiments.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jordan Louviere; Terry Flynn
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2007-01-25       Impact factor: 4.634

  3 in total
  5 in total

1.  A comparison of two experimental design approaches in applying conjoint analysis in patient-centered outcomes research: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Elizabeth T Kinter; Thomas J Prior; Christopher I Carswell; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Segmenting patients and physicians using preferences from discrete choice experiments.

Authors:  Ken Deal
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Modeling organizational justice improvements in a pediatric health service : a discrete-choice conjoint experiment.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Linda Kostrzewa; Heather Rimas; Yvonne Chen; Ken Deal; Susan Blatz; Alida Bowman; Don H Buchanan; Randy Calvert; Barbara Jennings
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Modeling the Mental Health Practice Change Preferences of Educators: A Discrete-Choice Conjoint Experiment.

Authors:  Charles E Cunningham; Melanie Barwick; Kathy Short; Yvonne Chen; Heather Rimas; Jenna Ratcliffe; Stephanie Mielko
Journal:  School Ment Health       Date:  2014

5.  Differentiated Care Preferences of Stable Patients on Antiretroviral Therapy in Zambia: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Ingrid Eshun-Wilson; Mpande Mukumbwa-Mwenechanya; Hae-Young Kim; Arianna Zannolini; Chanda P Mwamba; David Dowdy; Estella Kalunkumya; Mwansa Lumpa; Laura K Beres; Monika Roy; Anjali Sharma; Steph M Topp; Dave V Glidden; Nancy Padian; Peter Ehrenkranz; Izukanji Sikazwe; Charles B Holmes; Carolyn Bolton-Moore; Elvin H Geng
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2019-08-15       Impact factor: 3.731

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.