Patient preferences for treatment of Achilles tendon pain: Results from a discrete choice experiment

Patients’ preferences for treatment outcomes for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A conjoint analysis

“…Future research would benefit from combining preference data with clinically validated information about the respondents. Given the growing awareness and acceptance of patient preference methods, such as conjoint analysis, there is now greater scope to include such studies within clinical trial protocols [52].…”

One Size Does Not Fit All: Investigating Doctors' Stated Preference Heterogeneity for Job Incentives to Inform Policy in Thailand

“…Although a growing number of health economists have used RPL models to analyse DCEs in recent years (Hole 2008;Kjaer and Gyrd-Hansen 2008;Negrin et al, 2008;Eberth et al, 2009;Howard and Salkeld 2009;Blaauw et al, 2010;Kimman et al, 2010;Kruk et al, 2010;Scuffham et al, 2010;Sivey et al, 2010;Howard et al, 2011;Kruk et al, 2011;Sweeting et al, 2011;Vujicic et al, 2011;Whitty et al, 2011;Rockers et al, 2012), only a few of these studies have sought to explore respondents' heterogeneity of preferences for DCE attributes. That is, few papers using RPL models have gone beyond the use of random parameters and interacted these random coefficients with socio-demographic characteristics in the model.…”

Patient preferences in the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review of discrete choice experiments

“…1,5,6,10,17,19,22,26,27,43,51,53,56 One study examined mixed types of chronic pain, 10 and one study examined Achilles tendon pain. 47 Regarding statistical analyses, 12 studies used the logit model, 1,5,6,10,17,19,22,26,27,47,51,53,56 2 used the probit model, 10,43 and 2 used the latent class model. 16,52 A median of 6 attributes was assessed in the surveys, with mean levels per attribute ranging from 2.8 to 5.…”

“…5,6,19,27,47 In the domain of "Completeness of data," 5 studies were evaluated as having a low risk of bias, 1,5,6,26,47 5 studies with a moderate risk of bias, 9,10,16,22,43 and 5 studies with a serious risk of bias. 19,27,50,52,54 In the domain of "Measurement instrument," 14 studies were evaluated as having a low risk of bias, 1,6,10,11,17,19,22,26,27,43,47,50,52,54 whereas one study had a moderate risk of bias. 5 In the domain of "Data analysis," 13 studies were evaluated as having a low risk of bias, 1,9,11,17,19,22,26,27,43,47,50,52,54 whereas 2 studies had a serious risk of bias.…”

“…1,27,50,52,54 Onset of treatment efficacy was ranked among the top 3 most important attributes in 33.30% of the models. 6,26,47 Other attributes were only considered in one or 2 studies; thus, we were unable to summarize the frequencies of attribute importance and compute the relative weight.…”