Cargando…

Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion

Disease prioritization exercises have been used by several organizations to inform surveillance and control measures. Though most methodologies for disease prioritization are based on expert opinion, it is becoming more common to include different stakeholders in the prioritization exercise. This st...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stebler, Nadine, Schuepbach-Regula, Gertraud, Braam, Peter, Falzon, Laura Cristina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4788351/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26967655
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151394
_version_ 1782420715879792640
author Stebler, Nadine
Schuepbach-Regula, Gertraud
Braam, Peter
Falzon, Laura Cristina
author_facet Stebler, Nadine
Schuepbach-Regula, Gertraud
Braam, Peter
Falzon, Laura Cristina
author_sort Stebler, Nadine
collection PubMed
description Disease prioritization exercises have been used by several organizations to inform surveillance and control measures. Though most methodologies for disease prioritization are based on expert opinion, it is becoming more common to include different stakeholders in the prioritization exercise. This study was performed to compare the weighting of disease criteria, and the consequent prioritization of zoonoses, by both health professionals and students in Switzerland using a Conjoint Analysis questionnaire. The health professionals comprised public health and food safety experts, cantonal physicians and cantonal veterinarians, while the student group comprised first-year veterinary and agronomy students. Eight criteria were selected for this prioritization based on expert elicitation and literature review. These criteria, described on a 3-tiered scale, were evaluated through a choice-based Conjoint Analysis questionnaire with 25 choice tasks. Questionnaire results were analyzed to obtain importance scores (for each criterion) and mean utility values (for each criterion level), and the latter were then used to rank 16 zoonoses. While the most important criterion for both groups was “Severity of the disease in humans”, the second ranked criteria by the health professionals and students were “Economy” and “Treatment in humans”, respectively. Regarding the criterion “Control and Prevention”, health professionals tended to prioritize a disease when the control and preventive measures were described to be 95% effective, while students prioritized a disease if there were almost no control and preventive measures available. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy was the top-ranked disease by both groups. Health professionals and students agreed on the weighting of certain criteria such as “Severity” and “Treatment of disease in humans”, but disagreed on others such as “Economy” or “Control and Prevention”. Nonetheless, the overall disease ranking lists were similar, and these may be taken into consideration when making future decisions regarding resource allocation for disease control and prevention in Switzerland.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4788351
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47883512016-03-23 Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion Stebler, Nadine Schuepbach-Regula, Gertraud Braam, Peter Falzon, Laura Cristina PLoS One Research Article Disease prioritization exercises have been used by several organizations to inform surveillance and control measures. Though most methodologies for disease prioritization are based on expert opinion, it is becoming more common to include different stakeholders in the prioritization exercise. This study was performed to compare the weighting of disease criteria, and the consequent prioritization of zoonoses, by both health professionals and students in Switzerland using a Conjoint Analysis questionnaire. The health professionals comprised public health and food safety experts, cantonal physicians and cantonal veterinarians, while the student group comprised first-year veterinary and agronomy students. Eight criteria were selected for this prioritization based on expert elicitation and literature review. These criteria, described on a 3-tiered scale, were evaluated through a choice-based Conjoint Analysis questionnaire with 25 choice tasks. Questionnaire results were analyzed to obtain importance scores (for each criterion) and mean utility values (for each criterion level), and the latter were then used to rank 16 zoonoses. While the most important criterion for both groups was “Severity of the disease in humans”, the second ranked criteria by the health professionals and students were “Economy” and “Treatment in humans”, respectively. Regarding the criterion “Control and Prevention”, health professionals tended to prioritize a disease when the control and preventive measures were described to be 95% effective, while students prioritized a disease if there were almost no control and preventive measures available. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy was the top-ranked disease by both groups. Health professionals and students agreed on the weighting of certain criteria such as “Severity” and “Treatment of disease in humans”, but disagreed on others such as “Economy” or “Control and Prevention”. Nonetheless, the overall disease ranking lists were similar, and these may be taken into consideration when making future decisions regarding resource allocation for disease control and prevention in Switzerland. Public Library of Science 2016-03-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4788351/ /pubmed/26967655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151394 Text en © 2016 Stebler et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Stebler, Nadine
Schuepbach-Regula, Gertraud
Braam, Peter
Falzon, Laura Cristina
Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion
title Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion
title_full Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion
title_fullStr Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion
title_full_unstemmed Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion
title_short Weighting of Criteria for Disease Prioritization Using Conjoint Analysis and Based on Health Professional and Student Opinion
title_sort weighting of criteria for disease prioritization using conjoint analysis and based on health professional and student opinion
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4788351/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26967655
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151394
work_keys_str_mv AT steblernadine weightingofcriteriafordiseaseprioritizationusingconjointanalysisandbasedonhealthprofessionalandstudentopinion
AT schuepbachregulagertraud weightingofcriteriafordiseaseprioritizationusingconjointanalysisandbasedonhealthprofessionalandstudentopinion
AT braampeter weightingofcriteriafordiseaseprioritizationusingconjointanalysisandbasedonhealthprofessionalandstudentopinion
AT falzonlauracristina weightingofcriteriafordiseaseprioritizationusingconjointanalysisandbasedonhealthprofessionalandstudentopinion