Discrete Choice Experiments: A Guide to Model Specification, Estimation and Software

Lancsar, Emily; Fiebig, Denzil G.; Hole, Arne Risa

doi:10.1007/s40273-017-0506-4

Cited by 202 publications

(159 citation statements)

References 67 publications

(86 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

156

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, a variant of the BWDCE has been proposed, asking individuals to first choose their most preferred option (first best) and then their next preferred option (second best; Ghijben, Lancsar, & Zavarsek, 2014;Lancsar, Fiebig, & Hole, 2017). However, it is not clear how this "best-best" approach would differ from traditional ranking tasks, with their associated limitations (Ben-Akiva et al, 1991).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

For better or worse? Investigating the validity of best–worst discrete choice experiments in health

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are frequently used in health economics to measure preferences for nonmarket goods. Best–worst discrete choice experiment (BWDCE) has been proposed as a variant of the traditional “pick the best” approach. BWDCE, where participants choose the best and worst options, is argued to generate more precise preference estimates because of the additional information collected. However, the validity of the approach relies on two necessary conditions: (a) best and worst decisions provide similar information about preferences and (b) asking individuals to answer more than one choice question per task does not reduce data quality. Whether these conditions hold in empirical applications remains under researched. This is the first study to compare participants' choices across three experimental conditions: (a) BEST choices only, (b) WORST choices only, and (c) BEST and WORST choices (BWDCE). We find responses to worst choices are noisier. Implied preferences from the best only and worst only choices are qualitatively different, leading to different WTP values. Responses to BWDCE tasks have lower consistency, and respondents are more likely to use simplifying decision heuristics. We urge caution in using BWDCE as an alternative to the traditional “pick the best” DCE.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

For better or worse? Investigating the validity of best–worst discrete choice experiments in health

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The study was conducted in accordance with good practice guidance for DCEs . Qualitative interviews, the published literature and expert opinion were used to identify attributes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preferences for interventions designed to increase cervical screening uptake in non‐attending young women: How findings from a discrete choice experiment compare with observed behaviours in a trial

Campbell

Gray

Watson

et al. 2019

Health Expectations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Young women's attendance at cervical screening in the UK is continuing to fall, and the incidence of invasive cervical cancer is rising. Objectives:We assessed the preferences of non-attending young women for alternative ways of delivering cervical screening.Design: Postal discrete choice experiment (DCE) conducted during the STRATEGIC study of interventions for increasing cervical screening uptake. Attributes included action required to arrange a test, location of the test, availability of a nurse navigator and cost to the National Health Service.Setting and participants: Non-attending young women in two UK regions. Main outcome measures:Responses were analysed using a mixed multinomial logit model. A predictive analysis identified the most preferable strategy compared to current screening. Preferences from the DCE were compared with observed behaviours during the STRATEGIC trial. Results:The DCE response rate was 5.5% (222/4000), and 94% of respondents agreed screening is important. Preference heterogeneity existed around attributes with strong evidence for test location. Relative to current screening, unsolicited selfsampling kits for home use appeared most preferable. The STRATEGIC trial showed this same intervention to be most effective although many women who received it and were screened, attended for conventional cytology instead. Conclusions:The DCE and trial identified the unsolicited self-sampling kit as the most preferred/effective intervention. The DCE suggested that the decision of some | 203 CAMPBELL Et AL.

show abstract

“…For each approach, we sought to investigate whether the decision‐making strategies adopted concur with the theoretical assumptions underlying the application of DCE TTO and BWS methods in this context. Specifically, it is assumed that participants make choices according to the framework of random utility theory by considering all of the information presented to them and choosing the alternative that maximises their utility . For the DCE TTO task, this would involve the participant choosing their most preferred quality of life state and providing logical reason/s for this choice (eg option A involves better quality of life overall and a longer survival duration) .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, it is assumed that participants make choices according to the framework of random utility theory by considering all of the information presented to them and choosing the alternative that maximises their utility . For the DCE TTO task, this would involve the participant choosing their most preferred quality of life state and providing logical reason/s for this choice (eg option A involves better quality of life overall and a longer survival duration) . For BWS, this would involve the participant choosing the best and least attractive features of a single quality of life state and again providing logical reason/s for these choices …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do people with dementia and family carers value dementia‐specific quality of life states? An explorative “Think Aloud” study

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To investigate the decision‐making processes applied by people with dementia and family carers participating in using health economic approaches to value dementia‐specific quality of life states. Methods People with dementia (n = 13) and family carers (n = 14) participated in valuing quality of life states using two health economic approaches: Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) and Best Worst Scaling (BWS). Participants were encouraged to explain their reasoning using a “Think Aloud” approach. Results People with dementia and family carers adopted a range of decision‐making strategies including “anchoring” the presented states against current quality of life, or simplifying the decision‐making by focusing on the sub‐set of attributes deemed most important. Overall, there was strong evidence of task engagement for BWS and DCE. Conclusions Health economic valuation approaches can be successfully applied with people with dementia and family carers. These data can inform the assessment of benefits from their perspectives for incorporation within economic evaluation.

show abstract

Discrete Choice Experiments: A Guide to Model Specification, Estimation and Software

Cited by 202 publications

References 67 publications

For better or worse? Investigating the validity of best–worst discrete choice experiments in health

For better or worse? Investigating the validity of best–worst discrete choice experiments in health

Preferences for interventions designed to increase cervical screening uptake in non‐attending young women: How findings from a discrete choice experiment compare with observed behaviours in a trial

How do people with dementia and family carers value dementia‐specific quality of life states? An explorative “Think Aloud” study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About