One Method, Many Methodological Choices: A Structured Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments for Health State Valuation

被引:56
|
作者
Mulhern, Brendan [1 ]
Norman, Richard [2 ]
Street, Deborah J. [1 ]
Viney, Rosalie [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Technol, Ctr Hlth Econ Res & Evaluat, 1-59 Quay St, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia
[2] Curtin Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Kent St, Perth, WA 6102, Australia
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
QUALITY-OF-LIFE; PREFERENCE-BASED MEASURE; TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY; TIME TRADE-OFF; EQ-5D-5L VALUATION; VALUE SET; LATENT UTILITIES; SOCIAL CARE; VALUES; DCE;
D O I
10.1007/s40273-018-0714-6
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) are used in the development of preference-based measure (PBM) value sets. There is considerable variation in the methodological approaches used to elicit preferences. Our objective was to carry out a structured review of DCE methods used for health state valuation. PubMed was searched until 31 May 2018 for published literature using DCEs for health state valuation. Search terms to describe DCEs, the process of valuation and preference-based instruments were developed. English language papers with any study population were included if they used DCEs to develop or directly inform the production of value sets for generic or condition-specific PBMs. Assessment of paper quality was guided by the recently developed Checklist for Reporting Valuation Studies. Data were extracted under six categories: general study information, choice task and study design, type of designed experiment, modelling and analysis methods, results and discussion. The literature search identified 1132 published papers, and 63 papers were included in the review. Paper quality was generally high. The study design and choice task formats varied considerably, and a wide range of modelling methods were employed to estimate value sets. This review of DCE methods used for developing value sets suggests some recurring limitations, areas of consensus and areas where further research is required. Methodological diversity means that the values should be seen as experimental, and users should understand the features of the value sets produced before applying them in decision making.
引用
收藏
页码:29 / 43
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] One Method, Many Methodological Choices: A Structured Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments for Health State Valuation
    Brendan Mulhern
    Richard Norman
    Deborah J. Street
    Rosalie Viney
    [J]. PharmacoEconomics, 2019, 37 : 29 - 43
  • [2] Discrete Choice Experiments in Health State Valuation: A Systematic Review of Progress and New Trends
    Haode Wang
    Donna L. Rowen
    John E. Brazier
    Litian Jiang
    [J]. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2023, 21 : 405 - 418
  • [3] Discrete Choice Experiments in Health State Valuation: A Systematic Review of Progress and New Trends
    Wang, Haode
    Rowen, Donna L.
    Brazier, John E.
    Jiang, Litian
    [J]. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY, 2023, 21 (03) : 405 - 418
  • [4] Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review
    Choudhary, Daksh
    Thomas, Megan
    Pacheco-Barrios, Kevin
    Zhang, Yuan
    Alonso-Coello, Pablo
    Schunemann, Holger
    Hazlewood, Glen
    [J]. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2022, 15 (06): : 629 - 639
  • [5] Validity of discrete-choice experiments evidence for health risk reduction
    Telser, Harry
    Zweifel, Peter
    [J]. APPLIED ECONOMICS, 2007, 39 (01) : 69 - 78
  • [6] Methods to Summarize Discrete-Choice Experiments in a Systematic Review: A Scoping Review
    Daksh Choudhary
    Megan Thomas
    Kevin Pacheco-Barrios
    Yuan Zhang
    Pablo Alonso-Coello
    Holger Schünemann
    Glen Hazlewood
    [J]. The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2022, 15 : 629 - 639
  • [7] The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments
    Hoyos, David
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2010, 69 (08) : 1595 - 1603
  • [8] Estimating Willingness to Pay for Online Health Services with Discrete-Choice Experiments
    Chang, Jieun
    Savage, Scott J.
    Waldman, Donald M.
    [J]. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY, 2017, 15 (04) : 491 - 500
  • [9] Estimating Willingness to Pay for Online Health Services with Discrete-Choice Experiments
    Jieun Chang
    Scott J. Savage
    Donald M. Waldman
    [J]. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2017, 15 : 491 - 500
  • [10] Is Best-Worst Scaling Suitable for Health State Valuation? A Comparison with Discrete Choice Experiments
    Krucien, Nicolas
    Watson, Verity
    Ryan, Mandy
    [J]. HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2017, 26 (12) : E1 - E16