Literature DB >> 26992386

Choice Experiments to Quantify Preferences for Health and Healthcare: State of the Practice.

Axel Mühlbacher1,2, F Reed Johnson3.   

Abstract

Stated-preference methods increasingly are used to quantify preferences in health economics, health technology assessment, benefit-risk analysis and health services research. The objective of stated-preference studies is to acquire information about trade-off preferences among treatment outcomes, prioritization of clinical decision criteria, likely uptake or adherence to healthcare products and acceptability of healthcare services or policies. A widely accepted approach to eliciting preferences is discrete-choice experiments. Patient, physician, insurant or general-public respondents choose among constructed, experimentally controlled alternatives described by decision-relevant features or attributes. Attributes can represent complete health states, sets of treatment outcomes or characteristics of a healthcare system. The observed pattern of choice reveals how different respondents or groups of respondents implicitly weigh, value and assess different characteristics of treatments, products or services. An important advantage of choice experiments is their foundation in microeconomic utility theory. This conceptual framework provides tests of internal validity, guidance for statistical analysis of latent preference structures, and testable behavioural hypotheses. Choice experiments require expertise in survey-research methods, random-utility theory, experimental design and advanced statistical analysis. This paper should be understood as an introduction to setting up a basic experiment rather than an exhaustive critique of the latest findings and procedures. Where appropriate, we have identified topics of active research where a broad consensus has not yet been established.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26992386     DOI: 10.1007/s40258-016-0232-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy        ISSN: 1175-5652            Impact factor:   2.561


  45 in total

1.  How Do Older Adults Consider Age, Life Expectancy, Quality of Life, and Physician Recommendations When Making Cancer Screening Decisions? Results from a National Survey Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Ellen M Janssen; Craig E Pollack; Cynthia Boyd; John F P Bridges; Qian-Li Xue; Antonio C Wolff; Nancy L Schoenborn
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  The Role of Personality in Treatment-Related Outcome Preferences Among Pharmacy Students.

Authors:  Ernest H Law; Ruixuan Jiang; Anika Kaczynski; Axel Mühlbacher; A Simon Pickard
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 2.047

3.  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

4.  Estimating Preferences for Complex Health Technologies: Lessons Learned and Implications for Personalized Medicine.

Authors:  Deborah A Marshall; Juan Marcos Gonzalez; Karen V MacDonald; F Reed Johnson
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Giving Patients a Meaningful Voice in European Health Technology Assessments: The Role of Health Preference Research.

Authors:  Axel C Mühlbacher; F Reed Johnson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  Health Preference Research: An Overview.

Authors:  Benjamin M Craig; Emily Lancsar; Axel C Mühlbacher; Derek S Brown; Jan Ostermann
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.883

7.  Identifying Community Pharmacist Preferences For Prescribing Services in Primary Care in New Zealand: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Rakhee Raghunandan; Kirsten Howard; Carlo A Marra; June Tordoff; Alesha Smith
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 2.561

8.  Advancing the Use of Patient Preference Information as Scientific Evidence in Medical Product Evaluation: A Summary Report of the Patient Preference Workshop.

Authors:  Heather L Benz; Ting-Hsuan Joyce Lee; Jui-Hua Tsai; John F P Bridges; Sara Eggers; Megan Moncur; Fadia T Shaya; Ira Shoulson; Erica S Spatz; Leslie Wilson; Anindita Saha
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.883

9.  Preferences for Health Interventions: Improving Uptake, Adherence, and Efficiency.

Authors:  Jan Ostermann; Derek S Brown; Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Axel C Mühlbacher; Shelby D Reed
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  Stated Uptake of Physical Activity Rewards Programmes Among Active and Insufficiently Active Full-Time Employees.

Authors:  Semra Ozdemir; Marcel Bilger; Eric A Finkelstein
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.561

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.