Cargando…
Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care
INTRODUCTION: Best–worst scaling (BWS) is becoming increasingly popular to elicit preferences in health care. However, little is known about current practice and trends in the use of BWS in health care. This study aimed to identify, review and critically appraise BWS in health care, and to identify...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5110583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27402349 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5 |
_version_ | 1782467710861443072 |
---|---|
author | Cheung, Kei Long Wijnen, Ben F. M. Hollin, Ilene L. Janssen, Ellen M. Bridges, John F. Evers, Silvia M. A. A. Hiligsmann, Mickael |
author_facet | Cheung, Kei Long Wijnen, Ben F. M. Hollin, Ilene L. Janssen, Ellen M. Bridges, John F. Evers, Silvia M. A. A. Hiligsmann, Mickael |
author_sort | Cheung, Kei Long |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Best–worst scaling (BWS) is becoming increasingly popular to elicit preferences in health care. However, little is known about current practice and trends in the use of BWS in health care. This study aimed to identify, review and critically appraise BWS in health care, and to identify trends over time in key aspects of BWS. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, using Medline (via Pubmed) and EMBASE to identify all English-language BWS studies published up until April 2016. Using a predefined extraction form, two reviewers independently selected articles and critically appraised the study quality, using the Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, Significance (PREFS) checklist. Trends over time periods (≤2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015) were assessed further. RESULTS: A total of 62 BWS studies were identified, of which 26 were BWS object case studies, 29 were BWS profile case studies and seven were BWS multi-profile case studies. About two thirds of the studies were performed in the last 2 years. Decreasing sample sizes and decreasing numbers of factors in BWS object case studies, as well as use of less complicated analytical methods, were observed in recent studies. The quality of the BWS studies was generally acceptable according to the PREFS checklist, except that most studies did not indicate whether the responders were similar to the non-responders. CONCLUSION: Use of BWS object case and BWS profile case has drastically increased in health care, especially in the last 2 years. In contrast with previous discrete-choice experiment reviews, there is increasing use of less sophisticated analytical methods. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5110583 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51105832016-11-29 Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care Cheung, Kei Long Wijnen, Ben F. M. Hollin, Ilene L. Janssen, Ellen M. Bridges, John F. Evers, Silvia M. A. A. Hiligsmann, Mickael Pharmacoeconomics Systematic Review INTRODUCTION: Best–worst scaling (BWS) is becoming increasingly popular to elicit preferences in health care. However, little is known about current practice and trends in the use of BWS in health care. This study aimed to identify, review and critically appraise BWS in health care, and to identify trends over time in key aspects of BWS. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, using Medline (via Pubmed) and EMBASE to identify all English-language BWS studies published up until April 2016. Using a predefined extraction form, two reviewers independently selected articles and critically appraised the study quality, using the Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, Significance (PREFS) checklist. Trends over time periods (≤2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015) were assessed further. RESULTS: A total of 62 BWS studies were identified, of which 26 were BWS object case studies, 29 were BWS profile case studies and seven were BWS multi-profile case studies. About two thirds of the studies were performed in the last 2 years. Decreasing sample sizes and decreasing numbers of factors in BWS object case studies, as well as use of less complicated analytical methods, were observed in recent studies. The quality of the BWS studies was generally acceptable according to the PREFS checklist, except that most studies did not indicate whether the responders were similar to the non-responders. CONCLUSION: Use of BWS object case and BWS profile case has drastically increased in health care, especially in the last 2 years. In contrast with previous discrete-choice experiment reviews, there is increasing use of less sophisticated analytical methods. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2016-07-11 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC5110583/ /pubmed/27402349 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Systematic Review Cheung, Kei Long Wijnen, Ben F. M. Hollin, Ilene L. Janssen, Ellen M. Bridges, John F. Evers, Silvia M. A. A. Hiligsmann, Mickael Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care |
title | Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care |
title_full | Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care |
title_fullStr | Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care |
title_full_unstemmed | Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care |
title_short | Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care |
title_sort | using best–worst scaling to investigate preferences in health care |
topic | Systematic Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5110583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27402349 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cheungkeilong usingbestworstscalingtoinvestigatepreferencesinhealthcare AT wijnenbenfm usingbestworstscalingtoinvestigatepreferencesinhealthcare AT hollinilenel usingbestworstscalingtoinvestigatepreferencesinhealthcare AT janssenellenm usingbestworstscalingtoinvestigatepreferencesinhealthcare AT bridgesjohnf usingbestworstscalingtoinvestigatepreferencesinhealthcare AT everssilviamaa usingbestworstscalingtoinvestigatepreferencesinhealthcare AT hiligsmannmickael usingbestworstscalingtoinvestigatepreferencesinhealthcare |