Literature DB >> 24798402

Accounting for Attribute-Level Non-Attendance in a Health Choice Experiment: Does it Matter?

Seda Erdem1, Danny Campbell1, Arne Risa Hole2.   

Abstract

An extensive literature has established that it is common for respondents to ignore attributes of the alternatives within choice experiments. In most of the studies on attribute non-attendance, it is assumed that respondents consciously (or unconsciously) ignore one or more attributes of the alternatives, regardless of their levels. In this paper, we present a new line of enquiry and approach for modelling non-attendance in the context of investigating preferences for health service innovations. This approach recognises that non-attendance may not just be associated with attributes but may also apply to the attribute's levels. Our results show that respondents process each level of an attribute differently: while attending to the attribute, they ignore a subset of the attribute's levels. In such cases, the usual approach of assuming that respondents either attend to the attribute or not, irrespective of its levels, is erroneous and could lead to misguided policy recommendations. Our results indicate that allowing for attribute-level non-attendance leads to substantial improvements in the model fit and has an impact on estimated marginal willingness to pay and choice predictions.
Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords:  attribute non-attendance; attribute-level non-attendance; discrete mixture logit; discrete-choice experiments; health service innovations

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24798402     DOI: 10.1002/hec.3059

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


  7 in total

1.  Issues in the Design of Discrete Choice Experiments.

Authors:  Richard Norman; Benjamin M Craig; Paul Hansen; Marcel F Jonker; John Rose; Deborah J Street; Brendan Mulhern
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 3.883

2.  Using Eye-Tracking Technology with Older People in Memory Clinics to Investigate the Impact of Mild Cognitive Impairment on Choices for EQ-5D-5L Health States Preferences.

Authors:  Kaiying Wang; Chris Barr; Richard Norman; Stacey George; Craig Whitehead; Julie Ratcliffe
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2021-01       Impact factor: 2.561

Review 3.  Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics.

Authors:  Liz Morrell; Sarah Wordsworth; Sian Rees; Richard Barker
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Application of Discrete-Choice Experiment Methods in Tobacco Control: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Kabindra Regmi; Dinesh Kaphle; Sabina Timilsina; Nik Annie Afiqah Tuha
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2018-03

5.  What Does Society Value About Cancer Medicines? A Discrete Choice Experiment in the Belgian Population.

Authors:  Kim Pauwels; Isabelle Huys; Minne Casteels; Yvonne Denier; Martina Vandebroek; Steven Simoens
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 2.561

6.  Discrete choice analysis of health worker job preferences in Ethiopia: Separating attribute non-attendance from taste heterogeneity.

Authors:  Nikita Arora; Matthew Quaife; Kara Hanson; Mylene Lagarde; Dorka Woldesenbet; Abiy Seifu; Romain Crastes Dit Sourd
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 2.395

7.  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

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.