scholarly journals Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 661-677 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Lancsar ◽  
Jordan Louviere
2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 681-692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domino Determann ◽  
Dorte Gyrd-Hansen ◽  
G. Ardine de Wit ◽  
Esther W. de Bekker-Grob ◽  
Ewout W. Steyerberg ◽  
...  

Background. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used in the health care context to inform on patient preferences for health care services. In order for such experiments to provide useful and policy-relevant information, it is vital that the design includes those options that the respondent faces in the real-life situation. Whether to include opt-out, neither, or status quo alternatives has, however, received little attention in the DCE literature. We aim to investigate whether the use of different unforced choice formats affects DCE results in different settings: 1) opt-out versus neither in a health care market where there is no status quo and 2) including status quo in addition to opt-out in a health care market with a status quo. Design. A DCE on Dutch citizens’ preferences for personal health records served as our case, and 3189 respondents were allocated to the different unforced choice formats. We used mixed logit error component models to estimate preferences. Results. We found that the use of different unforced choice formats affects marginal utilities and welfare estimates and hence the conclusions that will be drawn from the DCE to inform health care decision making. Conclusions. To avoid biased estimates, we recommend that researchers are hesitant to use the neither option and consider including a status quo in addition to opt-out in settings where a status quo exists.


2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura J. James ◽  
Germaine Wong ◽  
Allison Tong ◽  
Jonathan C. Craig ◽  
Kirsten Howard ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 384-384
Author(s):  
Hyejin Kim ◽  
Molly Perkins ◽  
Thaddeus Pope ◽  
Patricia Comer ◽  
Mi-Kyung Song

Abstract ‘Unbefriended’ adults are those who lack decision-making capacity and have no surrogates or advance care plans. Little data exist on nursing homes (NHs)’ healthcare decision-making practices for unbefriended residents. This study aimed to describe NH staff’s perceptions of healthcare decision making on behalf of unbefriended residents. Sixty-six staff including administrators, physicians, nurses, and social workers from three NHs in one geographic area of Georgia, USA participated in a 31-item survey. Their responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and conventional content analysis. Of 66 participants, eleven had been involved in healthcare decision-making for unbefriended residents. The most common decision was do-not-resuscitate orders. Decisions primarily were made by relying on the resident’s primary care physician and/or discussing within a facility interdisciplinary team. Key considerations in the decision-making process included “evidence that the resident would not have wanted further treatment” and the perception that “further treatment would not be in the resident’s best interest”. Compared with decision making for residents with surrogates, participants perceived decision making for unbefriended residents to be equally-more difficult. Key barriers to making decisions included uncertainty regarding what the resident would have wanted in the given situation and concerns regarding the ethically and legally right course of action. Facilitators (reported by 52 participants) included some information/knowledge about the resident, an understanding regarding decision-making-related law/policy, and facility-level support. The findings highlight the complexity and difficulty of healthcare decision making for unbefriended residents and suggest more discussions among all key stakeholders to develop practical strategies to support decision-making practices in NHs.


2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Negar Mirzaee ◽  
Amirhossein Takian ◽  
Farshad Farzadfar ◽  
Rajabali Daroudi ◽  
Ali Kazemi Karyani ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Global concerns regarding the significant burden of non-communicable diseases and injuries (NCDIs) exist from both public health and economic perspectives. Our research focuses on the reduction of fatal risks due to NCDIs and the citizens’ preferences about health programs and intervention to reduce premature death due to NCDIs. Governments and health authorities need reliable evidence and information to prioritize the interests of their citizens. One crucial piece of evidence to justify the resources spent on NCDIs is the value derived from the interventions on prevention and NCDIs control. This concept is usually called “Value of Statistical Life” (VSL), meaning the monetary value that individuals place on changes in the risk levels of life- threatening events. To the best of our knowledge, for the first time, our study will estimate the statistical value of life for selected interventions for the prevention and control of NCDIs at both national and sub-national levels in the context of Iran. This paper reports the development of a national protocol through Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) method. Methods and designs Our study comprises several stages: (a) a literature review to identify the attributes and levels of the prevention programs and Willingness to Pay (WTP) for reducing the NCDI’s fatal risks; (b) experimental design to assessing, prioritizing, and finalizing the identified attributes and levels; (c) instrumental design to conduct face-to-face structured survey interviews of 3180 respondents aged 18–69 across the entire country; (d) statistical analysis to estimate the results through the Mixed Multinomial logit (MMNL) model. Discussion We anticipate that our findings will help build a stronger empirical basis for monetizing the value of small changes in selected fatality risks. It paves the way for other national or vast VSL estimates for NCDIs, as well as other major causes of morbidity and mortality in the context of Iran, and perhaps other low and middle-income countries (LMICs).


Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 2677
Author(s):  
Anastasios Bastounis ◽  
John Buckell ◽  
Jamie Hartmann-Boyce ◽  
Brian Cook ◽  
Sarah King ◽  
...  

Food production is a major contributor to environmental damage. More environmentally sustainable foods could incur higher costs for consumers. In this review, we explore whether consumers are willing to pay (WTP) more for foods with environmental sustainability labels (‘ecolabels’). Six electronic databases were searched for experiments on consumers’ willingness to pay for ecolabelled food. Monetary values were converted to Purchasing Power Parity dollars and adjusted for country-specific inflation. Studies were meta-analysed and effect sizes with confidence intervals were calculated for the whole sample and for pre-specified subgroups defined as meat-dairy, seafood, and fruits-vegetables-nuts. Meta-regressions tested the role of label attributes and demographic characteristics on participants’ WTP. Forty-three discrete choice experiments (DCEs) with 41,777 participants were eligible for inclusion. Thirty-five DCEs (n = 35,725) had usable data for the meta-analysis. Participants were willing to pay a premium of 3.79 PPP$/kg (95%CI 2.7, 4.89, p ≤ 0.001) for ecolabelled foods. WTP was higher for organic labels compared to other labels. Women and people with lower levels of education expressed higher WTP. Ecolabels may increase consumers’ willingness to pay more for environmentally sustainable products and could be part of a strategy to encourage a transition to more sustainable diets.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document