Accounting for Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare-Related Discrete Choice Experiments when Comparing Stated Preferences: A Systematic Review

BackgroundScale heterogeneity, or differences in the error variance of choices, may account for a significant amount of the observed variation in the results of discrete choice experiments (DCEs) when comparing preferences between different groups of respondents.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify if, and how, scale heterogeneity has been addressed in healthcare DCEs that compare the preferences of different groups.MethodsA systematic review identified all healthcare DCEs published between 1990 and February 2016. The full-text of each DCE was then screened to identify studies that compared preferences using data generated from multiple groups. Data were extracted and tabulated on year of publication, samples compared, tests for scale heterogeneity, and analytical methods to account for scale heterogeneity. Narrative analysis was used to describe if, and how, scale heterogeneity was accounted for when preferences were compared.ResultsA total of 626 healthcare DCEs were identified. Of these 199 (32%) aimed to compare the preferences of different groups specified at the design stage, while 79 (13%) compared the preferences of groups identified at the analysis stage. Of the 278 included papers, 49 (18%) discussed potential scale issues, 18 (7%) used a formal method of analysis to account for scale between groups, and 2 (1%) accounted for scale differences between preference groups at the analysis stage. Scale heterogeneity was present in 65% (n = 13) of studies that tested for it. Analytical methods to test for scale heterogeneity included coefficient plots (n = 5, 2%), heteroscedastic conditional logit models (n = 6, 2%), Swait and Louviere tests (n = 4, 1%), generalised multinomial logit models (n = 5, 2%), and scale-adjusted latent class analysis (n = 2, 1%).ConclusionsScale heterogeneity is a prevalent issue in healthcare DCEs. Despite this, few published DCEs have discussed such issues, and fewer still have used formal methods to identify and account for the impact of scale heterogeneity. The use of formal methods to test for scale heterogeneity should be used, otherwise the results of DCEs potentially risk producing biased and potentially misleading conclusions regarding preferences for aspects of healthcare.

[1]  C. Dirksen,et al.  EE1 DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENTS OF COMPLEX HEALTH CARE DECISIONS: DOES HIERARCHICAL INFORMATION INTEGRATION OFFER A SOLUTION? , 2008 .

[2]  M. English,et al.  Policy interventions that attract nurses to rural areas: a multicountry discrete choice experiment. , 2010, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[3]  K. Payne,et al.  Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: a systematic review , 2015, International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy.

[4]  A. Scott,et al.  Improving Chinese primary care providers' recruitment and retention: a discrete choice experiment. , 2015, Health policy and planning.

[5]  Salimah H. Meghani,et al.  Measuring preferences for analgesic treatment for cancer pain: How do African-Americans and Whites perform on choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis experiments? , 2013, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[6]  A. Scott,et al.  What do nurses and midwives value about their jobs? Results from a discrete choice experiment , 2015, Journal of health services research & policy.

[7]  Decision-making criteria among European patients : exploring patient preferences for primary care services , 2015 .

[8]  F. Johnson,et al.  Effects of simplifying choice tasks on estimates of taste heterogeneity in stated-choice surveys. , 2010, Social science & medicine.

[9]  J. Bridges,et al.  Using Latent Class Analysis to Model Preference Heterogeneity in Health: A Systematic Review , 2018, PharmacoEconomics.

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

[11]  E. Steyerberg,et al.  Patients' and urologists' preferences for prostate cancer treatment: a discrete choice experiment , 2013, British Journal of Cancer.

[12]  David A. Hensher,et al.  The Mixed Logit Model: the State of Practice and Warnings for the Unwary , 2001 .

[13]  David A. Hensher,et al.  A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit , 2003 .

[14]  F. Fisher Tests of Equality Between Sets of Coefficients in Two Linear Regressions: An Expository Note , 1970 .

[15]  J. R. DeShazo,et al.  Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency , 2002 .

[16]  Denzil G Fiebig,et al.  What influences participation in genetic carrier testing? Results from a discrete choice experiment. , 2006, Journal of health economics.

[17]  A. Montgomery,et al.  Women and their partners' preferences for Down's syndrome screening tests: a discrete choice experiment , 2013, Prenatal diagnosis.

[18]  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.

[19]  Jj Louviere,et al.  Confound it! That pesky little scale constant messes up our convenient assumptions , 2006 .

[20]  Elizabeth T. Kinter,et al.  A Comparison of Two Experimental Design Approaches in Applying Conjoint Analysis in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research , 2012, The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research.

[21]  E. Finkelstein,et al.  Preferences for end-of-life care among community-dwelling older adults and patients with advanced cancer: A discrete choice experiment. , 2015, Health policy.

[22]  J. Araña,et al.  The effect of medical experience on the economic evaluation of health policies. A discrete choice experiment. , 2006, Social science & medicine.

[23]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[24]  M. Koopmanschap,et al.  Dear policy maker: Have you made up your mind? A discrete choice experiment among policy makers and other health professionals , 2010, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[25]  Denzil G. Fiebig,et al.  The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity , 2010, Mark. Sci..

[26]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Combining sources of preference data , 1998 .

[27]  Richard T. Carson,et al.  Combining Sources of Preference Data for Modeling Complex Decision Processes , 1999 .

[28]  J. Ratcliffe,et al.  Cognitive overload? An exploration of the potential impact of cognitive functioning in discrete choice experiments with older people in health care. , 2014, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[29]  A. Mühlbacher,et al.  One size does not fit all: HIV testing preferences differ among high-risk groups in Northern Tanzania , 2015, AIDS care.

[30]  Dorte Gyrd-Hansen,et al.  Do general practitioners know patients' preferences? An empirical study on the agency relationship at an aggregate level using a discrete choice experiment. , 2012, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[31]  Arne Risa Hole,et al.  Small-sample properties of tests for heteroscedasticity in the conditional logit model , 2006 .

[32]  Carolyn J. Barg,et al.  Public Perceptions of the Benefits and Risks of Newborn Screening , 2015, Pediatrics.

[33]  Jeroen K. Vermunt,et al.  Removing the Scale Factor Confound in Multinomial Logit Choice Models to Obtain Better Estimates of Preference 1 , 2022 .

[34]  C. Dirksen,et al.  Does the Inclusion of a Cost Attribute Result in Different Preferences for the Surgical Treatment of Primary Basal Cell Carcinoma? , 2010, PharmacoEconomics.

[35]  D. Street,et al.  Decisions about Pap tests: what influences women and providers? , 2009, Social science & medicine.

[36]  Marit E. Kragt,et al.  Interpretation issues in heteroscedastic conditional logit models , 2016 .

[37]  Katherine Payne,et al.  A comparison of parents' and anaesthetists' preferences for attributes of child day case surgery: An application of discrete choice methodology , 2007 .

[38]  D. McFadden The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research , 1986 .

[39]  R. Viney,et al.  Individual preferences for diet and exercise programmes: changes over a lifestyle intervention and their link with outcomes , 2009, Public Health Nutrition.

[40]  Mandy Ryan,et al.  Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections. , 2003, Applied health economics and health policy.

[41]  Katherine Payne,et al.  Valuing pharmacogenetic testing services: a comparison of patients' and health care professionals' preferences. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[42]  Stephane Hess,et al.  Correlation and scale in mixed logit models , 2017 .

[43]  K. Payne,et al.  Eliciting Preferences for Information Provision in Newborn Bloodspot Screening Programs. , 2017, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[44]  D. Rigby,et al.  Preference Stability and Choice Consistency in Discrete Choice Experiments , 2016 .

[45]  Caroline Vass,et al.  The Role of Qualitative Research Methods in Discrete Choice Experiments , 2017, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[46]  Janine A van Til,et al.  Words or graphics to present a Discrete Choice Experiment: Does it matter? , 2015, Patient education and counseling.

[47]  Margaret E Kruk,et al.  Preferences for working in rural clinics among trainee health professionals in Uganda: a discrete choice experiment , 2012, BMC Health Services Research.

[48]  John F P Bridges,et al.  A comparison of two experimental design approaches in applying conjoint analysis in patient-centered outcomes research: a randomized trial. , 2012, The patient.

[49]  Arne Risa Hole,et al.  Modelling heterogeneity in patients' preferences for the attributes of a general practitioner appointment. , 2008, Journal of health economics.

[50]  John M. Rose,et al.  Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models? , 2012 .

[51]  D. Street,et al.  The effect of adverse information and positive promotion on women's preferences for prescribed contraceptive products. , 2013, Social science & medicine.

[52]  András Simonovits,et al.  Optimal Design of Pension Rule with Flexible Retirement: The Two-Type Case , 2006 .

[53]  Katherine Payne,et al.  A comparison of parents and pediatric anesthesiologists’ preferences for attributes of child daycase surgery: a discrete choice experiment , 2007, Paediatric anaesthesia.

[54]  D. Moher,et al.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement , 2009, BMJ.

[55]  Katherine Payne,et al.  Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare Discrete Choice Experiments: A Primer , 2018, The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research.

[56]  C. Dirksen,et al.  Discrete choice experiments for complex health-care decisions: does hierarchical information integration offer a solution? , 2009, Health economics.

[57]  C. Thompson,et al.  Prioritising health service innovation investments using public preferences: a discrete choice experiment , 2014, BMC Health Services Research.

[58]  Aki Tsuchiya,et al.  Testing a discrete choice experiment including duration to value health states for large descriptive systems: Addressing design and sampling issues , 2014, Social science & medicine.

[59]  Catherine Pope,et al.  Is Fast Access to General Practice all that Should Matter? A Discrete Choice Experiment of Patients’ Preferences , 2008, Journal of health services research & policy.

[60]  K. Train,et al.  On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths , 2000 .

[61]  J. Olsen,et al.  The impact of pecuniary and non-pecuniary incentives for attracting young doctors to rural general practice. , 2015, Social science & medicine.

[62]  Mickael Bech,et al.  Does the number of choice sets matter? Results from a web survey applying a discrete choice experiment. , 2011, Health economics.

[63]  Using discrete choice modeling to evaluate the preferences and willingness to pay for leptospirosis vaccine , 2015, Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics.

[64]  F Reed Johnson,et al.  Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care. , 2009, Journal of health economics.

[65]  J. Veldwijk,et al.  The Predictive Value of Discrete Choice Experiments in Public Health: An Exploratory Application , 2015, The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research.

[66]  Y. Hanoch,et al.  Determinants of coverage decisions in health insurance marketplaces: consumers' decision-making abilities and the amount of information in their choice environment. , 2015, Health services research.

[67]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .