Background Although preference research finds its origins in consumer research, preference elicitation methods have increasingly attracted attention in different decision-making contexts in health care. Simulating real-life decision making is believed to be important during consumer preference elicitation. Objective The aims of this study were to compare the process of decision making between patients and consumers and to identify methods from the consumer research field that could be applied in patient preference elicitation. Methods A narrative literature review was performed to identify preference elicitation concepts from a consumer context that could offer improvements in health care. Results The process of decision making between patients and consumers was highly comparable. The following five concepts from the consumer research field that could effectively simulate a real-life decision-making process for applications in health care were identified: simulating alternatives, self-reflection, feedback-driven exploration, separated (adaptive) dual response, and arranging profiles in blocks. Conclusions Owing to similarities in the decision-making process, patients could be considered as a subgroup of consumers, suggesting that preference elicitation concepts from the consumer field may be relevant in health care. Five concepts that help to simulate real-life decision making have the potential to improve patient preference elicitation. However, the extent to which real decision-making contexts can be mimicked in health care remains unknown.
OBJECTIVES: Although preference research originated in consumer market research, preference elicitation methods increasingly gained attention in healthcare over the last decade. Information on patients' perceptions and trade-offs can inform decision-making in different stages of the medicinal product life cycle. However, uncertainties regarding the application of preference methods in healthcare remain as it is not always clear how to adjust methods appropriately for elicitation of patient preferences. METHODS: A scoping review is performed to identify novel concepts on preference elicitation in consumer context, that may offer innovative applications in healthcare. The applicability is assessed by comparing with the current standards for patient preference methods, set by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC) and ISPOR Conjoint Analysis task forces. RESULTS: Five concepts are identified with promising value in healthcare: simulating alternatives, self-reflection, feedback-driven exploration, separated (adaptive) dual response and arranging profiles in blocks. The common thread between these concepts is the aim to resemble the real-life decision process of the patient as closely as possible, allowing to elicit 'true preferences'. The outcomes of preference studies adopting these concepts confirm that preference elicitation experiments that resemble the real-life situation, result in more accurate measurements. CONCLUSIONS: The process of acquiring information about new available products by consumers before deciding about buying a product, strongly resembles the process of patients familiarizing themselves with benefits and risks before deciding on their preferred treatment option. Meeting patients' informational needs and creating a real-life decision context wherein patients have time to self-reflect, could potentially improve preference elicitation in healthcare. OBJECTIVES:The objective of this study was to assess whether utility source references used in economic modelling for health technology assessment come from widely cited publications. METHODS: We reviewed The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal documents and Evidence Review Group (ERG) comments for diseases across four therapeutic areas: oncology, cardiology, ophthalmology and mental health. Utility values used in manufacturer's submissions and ERG models were identified and corresponding references were extracted. The application of Publish or Perish was used to identify most commonly cited citations from Google Scholar. Different combinations of keywords were tested. Most commonly cited citations and utility references were compared. RESULTS: References from 8 documents were reviewed. In general, 65% (18/28) of the utility source references were among the mostly cited references (with minimum 20 citations): 91% (10/11) in the ophthalmology, 57% (4/7) in oncology, 50% (3/6) in mental health, and 25% (1/4) in cardiology. Our results have shown that most of util...
BACKGROUND Although preference research finds its origins in consumer research, preference elicitation methods have increasingly attracted attention in different decision-making contexts in health care. Simulating real-life decision making is believed to be important during consumer preference elicitation. OBJECTIVE The aims of this study were to compare the process of decision making between patients and consumers and to identify methods from the consumer research field that could be applied in patient preference elicitation. METHODS A narrative literature review was performed to identify preference elicitation concepts from a consumer context that could offer improvements in health care. RESULTS The process of decision making between patients and consumers was highly comparable. The following five concepts from the consumer research field that could effectively simulate a real-life decision-making process for applications in health care were identified: simulating alternatives, self-reflection, feedback-driven exploration, separated (adaptive) dual response, and arranging profiles in blocks. CONCLUSIONS Owing to similarities in the decision-making process, patients could be considered as a subgroup of consumers, suggesting that preference elicitation concepts from the consumer field may be relevant in health care. Five concepts that help to simulate real-life decision making have the potential to improve patient preference elicitation. However, the extent to which real decision-making contexts can be mimicked in health care remains unknown.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.