Discrete Choice Experiments in Health State Valuation: A Systematic Review of Progress and New Trends

被引:9
|
作者
Wang, Haode [1 ]
Rowen, Donna L. [1 ]
Brazier, John E. [1 ]
Jiang, Litian [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Sheffield City Ctr, Sch Hlth & Related Res ScHARR, 30 Regent St, Sheffield S1 4DA, England
[2] Shenzhen Hlth Dev Res & Data Management Ctr, Hlth Policy Res Unit, Shenzhen, Guangdong, Peoples R China
关键词
OF-LIFE QUESTIONNAIRE; TIME TRADE-OFF; CLASSIFICATION-SYSTEM; EQ-5D-5L VALUATION; UTILITIES; CONJOINT; QLU-C10D; DESIGNS; PREFERENCES; SF-6DV2;
D O I
10.1007/s40258-023-00794-9
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
BackgroundDiscrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used in health state valuation studies.ObjectiveThis systematic review updates the progress and new findings of DCE studies in the health state valuation, covering the period since the review of June 2018 to November 2022. The review reports the methods that are currently being used in DCE studies to value health and study design characteristics, and, for the first time, reviews DCE health state valuation studies published in the Chinese language.MethodsEnglish language databases PubMed and Cochrane, and Chinese language databases Wanfang and CNKI were searched using the self-developed search terms. Health state valuation or methodology study papers were included if the study used DCE data to generate a value set for a preference-based measure. Key information extracted included DCE study design strategies applied, methods for anchoring the latent coefficient on to a 0-1 QALY scale and data analysis methods.ResultsSixty-five studies were included; one Chinese language publication and 64 English language publications. The number of health state valuation studies using DCE has rapidly increased in recent years and these have been conducted in more countries than prior to 2018. Wide usage of DCE with duration attributes, D-efficient design and models accounting for heterogeneity has continued in recent years. Although more methodological consensus has been found than in studies conducted prior to 2018, this consensus may be driven by valuation studies for common measures with an international protocol (the 'model' valuation research). Valuing long measures with well-being attributes attracted attention and more realistic design strategies (e.g., inconstant time preference, efficient design and implausible states design) were identified. However, more qualitative and quantitative methodology study is still necessary to evaluate the effect of those new methods.ConclusionsThe use of DCEs in health state valuation continues to grow dramatically and the methodology progress makes the method more reliable and pragmatic. However, study design is driven by international protocols and method selection is not always justified. There is no gold standard for DCE design, presentation format or anchoring method. More qualitative and quantitative methodology study is recommended to evaluate the effect of new methods before researchers make methodology decisions.
引用
收藏
页码:405 / 418
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Patient preferences in the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments
    Zhu, Mengting
    Dong, Dong
    Lo, Hermione Hin-Man
    Wong, Samuel Yeung-Shan
    Mo, Phoenix Kit-Han
    Sit, Regina Wing-Shan
    [J]. PAIN, 2023, 164 (04) : 675 - 689
  • [42] Patient Preferences for Breast Cancer Treatment Interventions: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments
    Renata Leborato Guerra
    Luciana Castaneda
    Rita de Cássia Ribeiro de Albuquerque
    Camila Belo Tavares Ferreira
    Flávia de Miranda Corrêa
    Ricardo Ribeiro Alves Fernandes
    Liz Maria de Almeida
    [J]. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2019, 12 : 559 - 569
  • [43] Preferences for pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV: A systematic review of discrete choice experiments
    Wulandari, Luh Putu Lila
    He, Shi Yi
    Fairley, Christopher K.
    Bavinton, Benjamin R.
    Schmidt, Heather-Marie
    Wiseman, Virginia
    Guy, Rebecca
    Tang, Weiming
    Zhang, Lei
    Ong, Jason J.
    [J]. ECLINICALMEDICINE, 2022, 51
  • [44] Patient preferences for stroke rehabilitation: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments (DCE's)
    Jolliffe, Laura
    Christie, Lauren
    Williams, Julie
    Parsons, Mark
    Pearce, Alison
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF STROKE, 2022, 17 (1_SUPPL) : 15 - 15
  • [45] Patient Preferences for Pharmacy Services: A Systematic Review of Studies Based on Discrete Choice Experiments
    Margaux Riboulet
    Anne-Laure Clairet
    Mohamed Bennani
    Virginie Nerich
    [J]. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2024, 17 : 13 - 24
  • [46] Patients' preferences for the treatment of anxiety and depressive disorders: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments
    Tunnessen, Maike
    Hiligsmann, Mickael
    Stock, Stephanie
    Vennedey, Vera
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2020, 23 (06) : 546 - 556
  • [47] PREFERENCE ELICITATION FOR CANCER TREATMENT IN EUROPE: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW OF DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENTS
    Krinke, K. S.
    Koenig, C.
    Jacob, C.
    Mittendorf, T.
    Braun, S.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2019, 22 : S501 - S501
  • [48] Patient Preferences for Breast Cancer Treatment Interventions: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments
    Guerra, Renata Leborato
    Castaneda, Luciana
    Ribeiro de Albuquerque, Rita de Cassia
    Tavares Ferreira, Camila Belo
    Correa, Flavia de Miranda
    Alves Fernandes, Ricardo Ribeiro
    de Almeida, Liz Maria
    [J]. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2019, 12 (06): : 559 - 569
  • [49] Parent, provider and vaccinee preferences for HPV vaccination: A systematic review of discrete choice experiments
    Lack, Alina
    Hiligsmann, Mickael
    Bloem, Paul
    Tunnessen, Maike
    Hutubessy, Raymond
    [J]. VACCINE, 2020, 38 (46) : 7226 - 7238
  • [50] Discrete choice experiments in the analysis of consumers' preferences for finfish products: A systematic literature review
    Cantillo, Javier
    Carlos Martin, Juan
    Roman, Concepcion
    [J]. FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE, 2020, 84