The rise of best-worst scaling for prioritization: A transdisciplinary literature review

Schuster, Anne L.R.; Crossnohere, Norah L.; Campoamor, Nicola B.; Hollin, Ilene L.; Bridges, John F.P.

doi:10.1016/j.jocm.2023.100466

Cited by 14 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 113 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…BWS experiments have advantages over other prioritization methods such as Likert scales [32][33][34] and was chosen because of its simplicity, low respondent burden, and strengths in measuring priorities [35,36]. BWS is increasingly used to assess the priorities of a wide array of stakeholders in medicine [37] and in other fields [38].…”

Section: Methods For Prioritizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritization of ethical concerns regarding HIV molecular epidemiology by public health practitioners and researchers

Schuster,

Bollinger,

Geller

et al. 2024

BMC Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background HIV molecular epidemiology (HIV ME) can support the early detection of emerging clusters of new HIV infections by combining HIV sequence data routinely obtained during the clinical treatment of people living with HIV with behavioral, geographic, and sociodemographic information. While information about emerging clusters promises to facilitate HIV prevention and treatment efforts, the use of this data also raises several ethical concerns. We sought to assess how those working on the frontlines of HIV ME, specifically public health practitioners (PHPs) and researchers, prioritized these issues. Methods Ethical issues were identified through literature review, qualitative in-depth interviews, and stakeholder engagement. PHPs and researchers using HIV ME prioritized the issues using best–worst scaling (BWS). A balanced incomplete block design was used to generate 11 choice tasks each consisting of a sub-set of 5 ethical concerns. In each task, respondents were asked to assess the most and least concerning issue. Data were analyzed using conditional logit, with a Swait-Louviere test of poolability. Latent class analysis was then used to explore preference heterogeneity. Results In total, 57 respondents completed the BWS experiment May–June 2023 with the Swait-Louviere test indicating that researchers and PHPs could be pooled (p = 0.512). Latent class analysis identified two classes, those highlighting “Harms” (n = 29) (prioritizing concerns about potential risk of legal prosecution, individual harm, and group stigma) and those highlighting “Utility” (n = 28) (prioritizing concerns about limited evidence, resource allocation, non-disclosure of data use for HIV ME, and the potential to infer the directionality of HIV transmission). There were no differences in the characteristics of members across classes. Conclusions The ethical issues of HIV ME vary in importance among stakeholders, reflecting different perspectives on the potential impact and usefulness of the data. Knowing these differences exist can directly inform the focus of future deliberations about the policies and practices of HIV ME in the United States.

show abstract

Section: Methods For Prioritizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritization of ethical concerns regarding HIV molecular epidemiology by public health practitioners and researchers

Schuster,

Bollinger,

Geller

et al. 2024

BMC Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…BWS, sometimes referred to as MaxDiff [26][27][28], was developed by Louviere and Woodworth in 1990 and its first application was published in 1992 [29]. This methodology evolved from the desire of creating user-friendly surveys.…”

Section: Best-worst Scalingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Multiple Benefits of Urban and Energy Regeneration Projects: A Stakeholder-Centred Methodological Approach

Bertolami,

Bisello,

Volpatti

et al. 2024

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An effective way to promote energy transition while tackling climate change involves redefining cities from being part of the problem to integral parts of the solution. Positive energy districts and climate positive circular communities are excellent examples of how this is feasible. But how do we understand which are the multiple benefits that these projects can bring to the local territory and relative community? This article aims to answer this question by developing a specific engagement and evaluation methodology. Our approach involves consulting with project partners to explore the multiple benefits of each case study. Subsequently, it plans to engage the stakeholders through the submission of a questionnaire to gather information regarding the relative importance of different benefits as perceived by each stakeholder. The questionnaire is based on the best–worst scaling method, which is a survey technique for determining people’s priorities. The preliminary findings of the study conducted on project partners of two European projects, ARV and ProLight, indicate a strong alignment with current European policy priorities. The involvement of other stakeholders in the study will serve to assess whether bottom-up priorities coincide with broader perspectives or whether adaptations to project strategies and dissemination approaches are needed.

show abstract

Measuring public relative importance for agricultural and rural multifunctionality: an application of case 1 best–worst scaling

Aizaki,

Akahori,

Yamamoto

2024

Paddy Water Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of agricultural and rural multifunctionality expands the public’s understanding of the diverse roles of agriculture and rural areas. However, the establishment of the concept burdens governments with a complicated issue related to formulating an agricultural and rural policy, as the public could have diverse views on the functions that should be promoted via the policy. This study applies case 1 best–worst scaling to measure the relative importance of agricultural and rural multifunctionality in Japan. Sixteen functions, including the primary function of agriculture (agricultural commodity output), were addressed. The results show that, on average, agricultural commodity output was prioritized most, followed by disaster prevention-related, water-related, and biological conservation functions. The clustering results demonstrate that the individuals were divided into seven classes and that the relative importance of functions among the seven classes differed significantly. The heterogeneity in the relative importance of functions among the public indicates that social consensus on weighting multifunctional roles in agricultural and rural policies cannot be reached easily.

show abstract

The rise of best-worst scaling for prioritization: A transdisciplinary literature review

Cited by 14 publications

References 113 publications

Prioritization of ethical concerns regarding HIV molecular epidemiology by public health practitioners and researchers

Prioritization of ethical concerns regarding HIV molecular epidemiology by public health practitioners and researchers

Exploring Multiple Benefits of Urban and Energy Regeneration Projects: A Stakeholder-Centred Methodological Approach

Measuring public relative importance for agricultural and rural multifunctionality: an application of case 1 best–worst scaling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About