Dataset Information

Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments.

ABSTRACT: Given the increasing number of genetic tests available, decisions have to be made on how to allocate limited health-care resources to them. Different criteria have been proposed to guide priority setting. However, their relative importance is unclear. Discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) and best-worst scaling experiments (BWSs) are methods used to identify and weight various criteria that influence orders of priority. This study tests whether these preference eliciting techniques can be used for prioritising genetic tests and compares the empirical findings resulting from these two approaches. Pilot DCE and BWS questionnaires were developed for the same criteria: prevalence, severity, clinical utility, alternatives to genetic testing available, infrastructure for testing and care established, and urgency of care. Interview-style experiments were carried out among different genetics professionals (mainly clinical geneticists, researchers and biologists). A total of 31 respondents completed the DCE and 26 completed the BWS experiment. Weights for the levels of the six attributes were estimated by conditional logit models. Although the results derived from the DCE and BWS experiments differed in detail, we found similar valuation patterns in the DCE and BWS experiments. The respondents attached greatest value to tests with high clinical utility (defined by the availability of treatments that reduce mortality and morbidity) and to testing for highly prevalent conditions. The findings from this study exemplify how decision makers can use quantitative preference eliciting methods to measure aggregated preferences in order to prioritise alternative clinical interventions. Further research is necessary to confirm the survey results.

SUBMITTER: Severin F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3798841 | biostudies-other | 2013 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments.

Severin Franziska F Schmidtke Jörg J Mühlbacher Axel A Rogowski Wolf H WH

European journal of human genetics : EJHG 20130313 11

Given the increasing number of genetic tests available, decisions have to be made on how to allocate limited health-care resources to them. Different criteria have been proposed to guide priority setting. However, their relative importance is unclear. Discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) and best-worst scaling experiments (BWSs) are methods used to identify and weight various criteria that influence orders of priority. This study tests whether these preference eliciting techniques can be used for ...[more]

PMID: 23486538

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveMaternal and newborn mortality rates are high in peri-urban areas in cities in Kenya, yet little is known about what drives women's decisions on where to deliver. This study aimed at understanding women's preferences on place of childbirth and how sociodemographic factors shape these preferences.MethodsThis study used a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) to quantify the relative importance of attributes on women's choice of place of childbirth within a peri-urban setting in Nairobi, Kenya. Participants were women aged 18-49 years, who had delivered at six health facilities. The DCE consisted of six attributes: cleanliness, availability of medical equipment and drug supplies, attitude of healthcare worker, cost of delivery services, the quality of clinical services, distance and an opt-out alternative. Each woman received eight questions. A conditional logit model established the relative strength of preferences. A mixed logit model was used to assess how women's preferences for selected attributes changed based on their sociodemographic characteristics.Results411 women participated in the Discrete Choice Experiment, a response rate of 97.6% and completed 20,080 choice tasks. Health facility cleanliness was found to have the strongest association with choice of health facility (β = 1.488 p<0.001) followed respectively by medical equipment and supplies availability (β = 1.435 p<0.001). The opt-out alternative (β = 1.424 p<0.001) came third. The attitude of the health care workers (β = 1.347, p<0.001), quality of clinical services (β = 0.385, p<0.001), distance (β = 0.339, p<0.001) and cost (β = 0.0002 p<0.001) were ranked 4th to 7th respectively. Women who were younger and were the main income earners having a stronger preference for clean health facilities. Older married women had stronger preference for availability of medical equipment and kind healthcare workers.ConclusionsWomen preferred both technical and process indicators of quality of care. DCE's can lead to the development of person-centered strategies that take into account the preferences of women to improve maternal and newborn health outcomes.

Project description:IntroductionFollow-up care is important for gastric cancer survivors, but follow-up strategies for gastric cancer survivors remain inconsistent, and compliance of gastric cancer survivors with follow-up care is very low. Understanding the needs and preferences of gastric cancer survivors is conducive to developing appropriate and acceptable follow-up strategies, thereby improving patient compliance. Discrete choice experiments can quantify individual needs and preferences. However, to date, there is no discrete choice experiment on the preferences of gastric cancer survivors, and no studies have examined how gastric cancer survivors make choices based on different characteristics of follow-up. This paper outlines an ongoing discrete choice experiment that aims to (1) explore follow-up service-related characteristics that may affect gastric cancer survivors' choices about their follow-up, (2) elicit how gastric cancer survivors consider the trade-offs among different follow-up service options using discrete choice experiment, (3) determine whether gastric cancer survivors' needs and preferences for follow-up vary due to the economy, politics, technology and culture in different regions.Methods and analysisSix attributes were developed through a literature review, semistructured interviews and experts and focus group discussions. A fractional factorial design was used to evaluate the interaction between attributes. A multiple logit model will be used to understand the trade-off between the follow-up characteristics of gastric cancer survivors. A mixed logit model will be used to explore the willingness to pay and uptake rate of gastric cancer survivors for follow-up attributes and further explore the preferences of different groups.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the ethics committee of the School of Nursing, Jilin University. The results of this study will be shared through online blogs, policy briefs, seminars and peer-reviewed journal articles and will be used to modify the current strategy of gastric cancer survivors' follow-up services according to economic development and regional culture.

Project description:BackgroundDeciding on pharmaceutical subsidy is regarded as a challenging issue for healthcare policymakers in Iran in most times. Public preferences, rarely attended in Iran, could be invaluable for including a particular drug in the list of subsidized medications.ObjectivesThe current study aims to elicit the public preferences to develop an evidence-based decision-making framework for entering a drug into the list of subsidies in Iran.MethodsDiscrete Choice Experiment (DCE) was employed to elicit the public preferences. Around 34 attributes were identified based on the systematic review and interview with 51 experts. By holding an expert panel, 7 attributes were finalized, namely: the survival after treatment, quality of life after treatment (QoL), alternative treatment, age group of the target population, cost burden for the government, disease severity, and drug manufacturer country. Next, 1224 households were selected for the survey in the city of Tehran, using random cluster sampling. Data were analyzed using conditional logit model.ResultsThe survival after treatment (β = 1.245; SE = 0.053) and disease severity (β =- 0.143; SE = 0.043) had the highest and lowest priority, respectively, in the preferences for allocating subsidy to a drug. In developed region, unlike the other two regions, the level of domestic drug production (β =- 0.302; SE = 0.073) was inversely associated with preferences toward allocating subsidy to a drug. In contrast to other districts, those living in district number one (β = 2.053; SE = 0.138) gave the highest value to promoting the QoL after treatment.ConclusionsIt is suggested that policymakers pay more attention to attributes such as effectiveness and alternative treatment when developing an evidence-based framework for entering a drug into the list of subsidies. This study highlighted the public belief in the government's subsidy for medicines, provided that, this results in an increased survival and QoL.

Project description:BackgroundVaccination can be viewed as comprising the most important defensive barriers to protect susceptible groups from infection. However, vaccine hesitancy for COVID-19 is widespread worldwide.ObjectiveWe aimed to systematically review studies eliciting the COVID-19 vaccine preference using discrete choice experiments.MethodsA literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL Plus platforms in April 2023. Search terms included discrete choice experiments, COVID-19, and vaccines and related synonyms. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the study characteristics. Subgroup analyses were performed by factors such as high-income countries and low- and middle-income countries and study period (before, during, and after the pandemic wave). Quality appraisal was performed using the 5-item Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, and Significance checklist.ResultsThe search yield a total of 623 records, and 47 studies with 53 data points were finally included. Attributes were grouped into 4 categories: outcome, process, cost, and others. The vaccine effectiveness (21/53, 40%) and safety (7/53, 13%) were the most frequently reported and important attributes. Subgroup analyses showed that vaccine effectiveness was the most important attribute, although the preference varied by subgroups. Compared to high-income countries (3/29, 10%), a higher proportion of low- and middle-income countries (4/24, 17%) prioritized safety. As the pandemic progressed, the duration of protection (2/24, 8%) during the pandemic wave and COVID-19 mortality risk (5/25, 20%) after the pandemic wave emerged as 2 of the most important attributes.ConclusionsOur review revealed the critical role of vaccine effectiveness and safety in COVID-19 vaccine preference. However, it should be noticed that preference heterogeneity was observed across subpopulations and may change over time.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42023422720; https://tinyurl.com/2etf7ny7.

Dataset Information

Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments.

Publications

Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets