The rise of best-worst scaling for prioritization: A transdisciplinary literature review

被引:9
|
作者
Schuster, Anne L. R. [1 ]
Crossnohere, Norah L. [2 ]
Campoamor, Nicola B. [1 ]
Hollin, Ilene L. [3 ]
Bridges, John F. P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ohio State Univ, Dept Biomed Informat, Coll Med, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[2] Ohio State Univ, Coll Med, Div Gen Internal Med, Columbus, OH USA
[3] Temple Univ, Dept Hlth Serv Adm & Policy, Coll Publ Hlth, Philadelphia, PA USA
关键词
Best-worst scaling; Choice experiments; Preference methods; Survey design; Transdisciplinary; DISCRETE-CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; CONJOINT-ANALYSIS APPLICATIONS; PATIENT PREFERENCES; CAREGIVER PREFERENCES; CONSUMER PREFERENCES; MALE CIRCUMCISION; HPV VACCINATION; HEALTH; DEMAND; MOTIVATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jocm.2023.100466
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Best-worst scaling (BWS) is a theory-driven choice experiment used for the prioritization of a finite number of options. Within the context of prioritization, BWS is also known as MaxDiff, BWS object case, and BWS Case 1. Now used in numerous fields, we conducted a transdisciplinary literature review of all published applications of BWS focused on prioritization to compare norms on the development, design, administration, analysis, and quality of BWS applications across fields. We identified 526 publications published before 2023 in the fields of health (n = 195), agriculture (n = 163), environment (n = 50), business (n = 50), linguistics (n = 24), transportation (n = 24), and other fields (n = 24). The application of BWS has been doubling every four years. BWS is applied globally with greatest frequency in North America (27.0%). Most studies had a clearly stated purpose (94.7%) that was empirical in nature (89.9%) with choices elicited in the present tense (90.9%). Apart from linguistics, most studies: applied at least one instrument development method (94.3%), used BWS to assess importance (63.1%), used 'most/ least' anchors (85.7%), and conducted heterogeneity analysis (69.0%). Studies predominantly administered surveys online (58.0%) and infrequently included formal sample size calculations (2.9%). BWS designs in linguistics differed significantly from other fields regarding the average number of objects (p < 0.01), average number of tasks (p < 0.01), average number of objects per task (p = 0.03), and average number of tasks presented to participants (p < 0.01). On a 5-point scale, the average PREFS score was 3.0. This review reveals the growing application of BWS for prioritization and promises to foster new transdisciplinary avenues of inquiry.
引用
收藏
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A formal and empirical comparison of two score measures for best-worst scaling
    Marley, A. A. J.
    Islam, T.
    Hawkins, G. E.
    JOURNAL OF CHOICE MODELLING, 2016, 21 : 15 - 24
  • [32] An introduction to the application of (case 1) best-worst scaling in marketing research
    Louviere, Jordan
    Lings, Ian
    Islam, Towhidul
    Gudergan, Siegfried
    Flynn, Terry
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN MARKETING, 2013, 30 (03) : 292 - 303
  • [33] USING BEST-WORST SCALING IN HORIZON SCANNING FOR HEPATOCELLULAR CARCINOMA TECHNOLOGIES
    Gallego, Gisselle
    Bridges, John F. P.
    Flynn, Terry
    Blauvelt, Barri M.
    Niessen, Louis W.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2012, 28 (03) : 339 - 346
  • [34] Feasibility of a best-worst scaling exercise to set priorities for autism research
    Davis, Scott A.
    Howard, Kirsten
    Ellis, Alan R.
    Jonas, Daniel E.
    Carey, Timothy S.
    Morrissey, Joseph P.
    Thomas, Kathleen C.
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2022, 25 (04) : 1643 - 1651
  • [35] Challenges to informed consent for exome sequencing: A best-worst scaling experiment
    Gore, Rachel H.
    Bridges, John F. P.
    Cohen, Julie S.
    Biesecker, Barbara B.
    JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING, 2019, 28 (06) : 1189 - 1197
  • [36] BEST-WORST SCALING IN HEALTH ECONOMICS IN CHINA: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE
    Jiang, S.
    Lu, J.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2020, 23 : S287 - S287
  • [38] Comparison of rating, best-worst scaling, and adolescents' real choices of snacks
    Mielby, Line Holler
    Edelenbos, Merete
    Thybo, Anette Kistrup
    FOOD QUALITY AND PREFERENCE, 2012, 25 (02) : 140 - 147
  • [39] DETERMINATION OF IMPORTANCE FOR NEW VACCINE ADOPTION: A BEST-WORST SCALING METHOD
    Pooripussarakul, S.
    Riewpaiboon, A.
    Bishai, D.
    Bridges, J. F.
    Tantivess, S.
    Muangchana, C.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2017, 20 (05) : A47 - A47
  • [40] Consumer Preferences for Olive Oil in Spain: A Best-Worst Scaling Approach
    Perez y Perez, Luis
    Gracia, Azucena
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2023, 15 (14)