Elimination and selection by aspects in health choice experiments: prioritising health service innovations.

Priorities for public health innovations are typically not considered equally by all members of the public. When faced with a choice between various innovation options, it is, therefore, possible that some respondents eliminate and/or select innovations based on certain characteristics. This paper proposes a flexible method for exploring and accommodating situations where respondents exhibit such behaviours, whilst addressing preference heterogeneity. We present an empirical case study on the public's preferences for health service innovations. We show that allowing for elimination-by-aspects and/or selection-by-aspects behavioural rules leads to substantial improvements in model fit and, importantly, has implications for willingness to pay estimates and scenario analysis.

[1]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Cost thresholds, cut-offs and sensitivities in stated choice analysis: identification and implications , 2011 .

[2]  S. Riedel-Heller,et al.  Public Attitudes towards Prevention of Obesity , 2012, PloS one.

[3]  Mylene Lagarde,et al.  Investigating attribute non-attendance and its consequences in choice experiments with latent class models. , 2013, Health economics.

[4]  J. Olsen Theories of justice and their implications for priority setting in health care. , 1997, Journal of health economics.

[5]  E. O'Shea,et al.  Eliciting preferences for resource allocation in mental health care in Ireland. , 2008, Health policy.

[6]  Jason Corburn,et al.  The power and the promise: working with communities to analyze data, interpret findings, and get to outcomes. , 2008, American journal of public health.

[7]  D. Hensher How do respondents process stated choice experiments? Attribute consideration under varying information load , 2006 .

[8]  Rosemary Barber,et al.  Can the impact of public involvement on research be evaluated? A mixed methods study , 2012, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[9]  Jonathan Boote,et al.  Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: a narrative review of case examples. , 2010, Health policy.

[10]  Arne Risa Hole,et al.  Inferred vs Stated Attribute Non-Attendance in Choice Experiments: A Study of Doctors' Prescription Behaviour , 2012 .

[11]  R. Baltussen,et al.  Decision-making criteria among national policymakers in five countries: a discrete choice experiment eliciting relative preferences for equity and efficiency. , 2012, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[12]  Andrew Daly,et al.  On the Equivalence Between Elimination-By-Aspects and Generalised Extreme Value Models of Choice Behaviour: , 2006 .

[13]  Peter Beresford,et al.  Developing the theoretical basis for service user/survivor-led research and equal involvement in research , 2005, Epidemiologia e Psichiatria Sociale.

[14]  Karen Gerard,et al.  Valuing the extended role of prescribing pharmacist in general practice: results from a discrete choice experiment. , 2012, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[15]  Philip Cotterell,et al.  Exploring the value of service user involvement in data analysis: ‘Our interpretation is about what lies below the surface’ , 2008 .

[16]  Riccardo Scarpa,et al.  Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments , 2008 .

[17]  John M. Rose,et al.  Design Efficiency for Non-Market Valuation with Choice Modelling: How to Measure it, What to Report and Why , 2008 .

[18]  Vikki Entwistle,et al.  Rationalising the 'irrational': a think aloud study of discrete choice experiment responses. , 2009, Health economics.

[19]  A. Anis,et al.  Patient preference for latent tuberculosis infection preventive treatment: a discrete choice experiment. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[20]  David A. Hensher,et al.  The implications on willingness to pay of respondents ignoring specific attributes , 2004 .

[21]  Aleksandra Torbica,et al.  Eliciting Preferences to Inform Patient-Centred Policies: the Case of Psoriasis , 2014, PharmacoEconomics.

[22]  Sarah Dyer Rationalising public participation in the health service: the case of research ethics committees. , 2004, Health & place.

[23]  John M. Rose,et al.  Inferring attribute non-attendance from stated choice data: implications for willingness to pay estimates and a warning for stated choice experiment design , 2012 .

[24]  M Ryan,et al.  Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques. , 2001, Health technology assessment.

[25]  Raffaele Zanoli,et al.  Inferred and Stated Attribute Non‐Attendance in Food Choice Experiments , 2013 .

[26]  A. Tversky Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. , 1972 .

[27]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Non-attendance to attributes in environmental choice analysis: a latent class specification , 2011 .

[28]  Mandy Ryan,et al.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. , 2012, Health economics.

[29]  J. Cairns,et al.  The estimation of marginal time preference in a UK-wide sample (TEMPUS) project. , 2000, Health technology assessment.

[30]  Stephane Hess,et al.  It’s not that I don’t care, I just don’t care very much: confounding between attribute non-attendance and taste heterogeneity , 2013 .

[31]  Karen Gerard,et al.  Exploring the social value of health-care interventions: a stated preference discrete choice experiment. , 2009, Health economics.

[32]  J M Grimshaw,et al.  Effectiveness and efficiency of guideline dissemination and implementation strategies , 2004, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[33]  A. Tsuchiya,et al.  Age-related preferences and age weighting health benefits. , 1999, Social science & medicine.

[34]  Arne Risa Hole,et al.  Accounting for Attribute-Level Non-Attendance in a Health Choice Experiment: Does it Matter? , 2015, Health economics.

[35]  J. Lassen,et al.  Attitudes to Publicly Funded Obesity Treatment and Prevention , 2011, Obesity.

[36]  W. B. Traill,et al.  What the UK public believes causes obesity, and what they want to do about it: A cross-sectional study , 2011, Journal of public health policy.

[37]  Fredrik Carlsson,et al.  Dealing with Ignored Attributes in Choice Experiments on Valuation of Sweden’s Environmental Quality Objectives , 2010 .

[38]  A. Tversky Choice by elimination , 1972 .

[39]  V. Entwistle,et al.  Consumer involvement in decisions about what health-related research is funded. , 2004, Health policy.

[40]  J. Cairns,et al.  Early asthma prophylaxis, natural history, skeletal development and economy (EASE): a pilot randomised controlled trial. , 2000, Health technology assessment.

[41]  J. Boote,et al.  Health researchers’ attitudes towards public involvement in health research , 2009, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[42]  Andrew Daly,et al.  Allowing for heterogeneous decision rules in discrete choice models: an approach and four case studies , 2011 .

[43]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Heuristic decision making. , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[44]  J. Dixon,et al.  Public involvement in health care , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[45]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Bounding WTP distributions to reflect the 'actual'consideration set , 2014 .