Labeled versus Unlabeled Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: An Application to Colorectal Cancer Screening

被引:159
作者
de Bekker-Grob, Esther W. [1 ]
Hol, Lieke [2 ]
Donkers, Bas [3 ]
van Dam, Leonie [2 ]
Habbema, J. Dik F. [1 ]
van Leerdam, Monique E. [2 ]
Kuipers, Ernst J. [2 ,4 ]
Essink-Bot, Marie-Louise [1 ,5 ]
Steyerberg, Ewout W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Rotterdam, Erasmus MC, Dept Publ Hlth, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Med Ctr Rotterdam, Erasmus MC, Dept Gastroenterol & Hepatol, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[3] Erasmus Univ, Dept Business Econ, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[4] Univ Med Ctr Rotterdam, Erasmus MC, Dept Internal Med, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[5] Univ Amsterdam, Acad Med Ctr, Dept Social Med, NL-1105 AZ Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
colorectal cancer screening; discrete choice experiment; feasibility; labeled alternatives; unlabeled alternatives; validity; WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY; DECISION-MAKING; DRUG-TREATMENT; PREFERENCES; SYMPTOMS; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00670.x
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
020101 [政治经济学];
摘要
Objectives: Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) in health economics commonly present choice sets in an unlabeled form. Labeled choice sets are less abstract and may increase the validity of the results. We empirically compared the feasibility, respondents' trading behavior, and convergent validity between a labeled and an unlabeled DCE for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs in The Netherlands. Methods: A labeled DCE version presented CRC screening test alternatives as "fecal occult blood test," "sigmoidoscopy," and "colonoscopy," whereas the unlabeled DCE version presented them as "screening test A" and "screening test B." Questionnaires were sent to participants and nonparticipants in CRC screening. Results: Total response rate was 276 (39%) out of 712 and 1033 (46%) out of 2267 for unlabeled and labeled DCEs, respectively (P < 0.001). The labels played a significant role in individual choices; approximately 22% of subjects had dominant preferences for screening test labels. The convergent validity was modest to low (participants in CRC screening: r = 0.54; P = 0.01; nonparticipants: r = 0.17; P = 0.45) largely because of different preferences for screening frequency. Conclusion: This study provides important insights in the feasibility and difference in results from labeled and unlabeled DCEs. The inclusion of labels appeared to play a significant role in individual choices but reduced the attention respondents give to the attributes. As a result, unlabeled DCEs may be more suitable to investigate trade-offs between attributes and for respondents who do not have familiarity with the alternative labels, whereas labeled DCEs may be more suitable to explain real-life choices such as uptake of cancer screening.
引用
收藏
页码:315 / 323
页数:9
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]
[Anonymous], 2008, SCREEN HOP HYP
[2]
Priority setting using multiple criteria: should a lung health programme be implemented in Nepal? [J].
Baltussen, R. ;
ten Asbroek, A. H. A. ;
Koolman, X. ;
Shrestha, N. ;
Bhattarai, P. ;
Niessen, L. W. .
HEALTH POLICY AND PLANNING, 2007, 22 (03) :178-185
[3]
Towards a multi-criteria approach for priority setting: an application to Ghana [J].
Baltussen, Rob ;
Stolk, Elly ;
Chisholm, Dan ;
Aikins, Moses .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2006, 15 (07) :689-696
[4]
Women and health care professionals' preferences for Down's Syndrome screening tests: a conjoint analysis study [J].
Bishop, AJ ;
Marteau, TM ;
Armstrong, D ;
Chitty, LS ;
Longworth, L ;
Buxton, MJ ;
Berlin, C .
BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2004, 111 (08) :775-779
[5]
A test of policy labels in environmental choice modelling studies [J].
Blamey, RK ;
Bennett, JW ;
Louviere, JJ ;
Morrison, MD ;
Rolfe, J .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2000, 32 (02) :269-286
[6]
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[7]
Bliemer M.C., 2006, Designing stated choice experiments: state of the art
[8]
Preferences of GPs and Patients for Preventive Osteoporosis Drug Treatment A Discrete-Choice Experiment [J].
de Bekker-Grob, Esther W. ;
Essink-Bot, Marie-Louise ;
Meerding, Willem Jan ;
Koes, Bart W. ;
Steyerberg, Ewout W. .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2009, 27 (03) :211-219
[9]
Estimates of the cancer incidence and mortality in Europe in 2006 [J].
Ferlay, J. ;
Autier, P. ;
Boniol, M. ;
Heanue, M. ;
Colombet, M. ;
Boyle, P. .
ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY, 2007, 18 (03) :581-592
[10]
Discrete choice experiment of smoking cessation behaviour in Japan [J].
Goto, Rei ;
Nishimura, Shuzo ;
Ida, Takanori .
TOBACCO CONTROL, 2007, 16 (05) :336-343