TY - JOUR
T1 - A labelled discrete choice experiment adds realism to the choices presented: preferences for surveillance tests for Barrett esophagus
AU - Kruijshaar, ME
AU - Bot, Marie-louise
AU - Donkers, Bas
AU - Looman, Caspar
AU - Siersema, PD (Peter)
AU - Steyerberg, Ewout
PY - 2009
Y1 - 2009
N2 - BACKGROUND: Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) allow systematic assessment of preferences by asking respondents to choose between scenarios. We conducted a labelled discrete choice experiment with realistic choices to investigate patients' trade-offs between the expected health gains and the burden of testing in surveillance of Barrett esophagus (BE). METHODS: Fifteen choice scenarios were selected based on 2 attributes: 1) type of test (endoscopy and two less burdensome fictitious tests), 2) frequency of surveillance. Each test-frequency combination was associated with its own realistic decrease in risk of dying from esophageal adenocarcinoma. A conditional logit model was fitted. RESULTS: Of 297 eligible patients (155 BE and 142 with non-specific upper GI symptoms), 247 completed the questionnaire (84%). Patients preferred surveillance to no surveillance. Current surveillance schemes of once every 1-2 years were amongst the most preferred alternatives. Higher health gains were preferred over those with lower health gains, except when test frequencies exceeded once a year. For similar health gains, patients preferred video-capsule over saliva swab and least preferred endoscopy. CONCLUSION: This first example of a labelled DCE using realistic scenarios in a healthcare context shows that such experiments are feasible. A comparison of labelled and unlabelled designs taking into account setting and research question is recommended.
AB - BACKGROUND: Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) allow systematic assessment of preferences by asking respondents to choose between scenarios. We conducted a labelled discrete choice experiment with realistic choices to investigate patients' trade-offs between the expected health gains and the burden of testing in surveillance of Barrett esophagus (BE). METHODS: Fifteen choice scenarios were selected based on 2 attributes: 1) type of test (endoscopy and two less burdensome fictitious tests), 2) frequency of surveillance. Each test-frequency combination was associated with its own realistic decrease in risk of dying from esophageal adenocarcinoma. A conditional logit model was fitted. RESULTS: Of 297 eligible patients (155 BE and 142 with non-specific upper GI symptoms), 247 completed the questionnaire (84%). Patients preferred surveillance to no surveillance. Current surveillance schemes of once every 1-2 years were amongst the most preferred alternatives. Higher health gains were preferred over those with lower health gains, except when test frequencies exceeded once a year. For similar health gains, patients preferred video-capsule over saliva swab and least preferred endoscopy. CONCLUSION: This first example of a labelled DCE using realistic scenarios in a healthcare context shows that such experiments are feasible. A comparison of labelled and unlabelled designs taking into account setting and research question is recommended.
U2 - 10.1186/1471-2288-9-31
DO - 10.1186/1471-2288-9-31
M3 - Article
C2 - 19454022
SN - 1471-2288
VL - 9
SP - 31
EP - 10
JO - BMC Medical Research Methodology
JF - BMC Medical Research Methodology
IS - 1
ER -