Skip to main content
Erschienen in: The European Journal of Health Economics 4/2005

01.12.2005 | Original Papers

Discrete choice experiments in health economics

Distinguishing between the method and its application

verfasst von: Emily Lancsar, Cam Donaldson

Erschienen in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Ausgabe 4/2005

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Bryan and Dolan have offered a critique of the use of discrete choice experiments in health economics. Their call for more open debate on “the relative strengths and limitations of the DCE method, particularly when applied in health settings” is warranted. However, their paper has only added to part of this debate in that it focuses on the application of choice experiments in the health sector but says little on the strengths and limitations of the DCE method in general. We argue that while the criticisms posed by Bryan and Dolan rightly challenge the manner in which DCEs have been applied in health economics, such criticism does not challenge the theoretical/methodological basis of DCEs per se.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Bryan S, Dolan P (2004) Discrete choice experiments in health economics. For better or for worse? Eur J Health Econ 5:199–202CrossRefPubMed Bryan S, Dolan P (2004) Discrete choice experiments in health economics. For better or for worse? Eur J Health Econ 5:199–202CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Viney R, Lancsar E, Louviere J (2002) Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2:319–326CrossRef Viney R, Lancsar E, Louviere J (2002) Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2:319–326CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Lancsar E, Savage E (2004) Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: inconsistency between current methods and random utility and welfare theory. Health Econ Lett 13:901–907CrossRef Lancsar E, Savage E (2004) Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: inconsistency between current methods and random utility and welfare theory. Health Econ Lett 13:901–907CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Lancsar E, Savage E (2004) Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: a response to Ryan and Santos Silva. Health Econ Lett 13:919–924CrossRef Lancsar E, Savage E (2004) Deriving welfare measures from discrete choice experiments: a response to Ryan and Santos Silva. Health Econ Lett 13:919–924CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Olsen JA, Donaldson C (1998) Helicopters, hearts and hips: using willingness to pay to set priorities for public sector health care programmes. Soc Sci Med 46:1–12CrossRefPubMed Olsen JA, Donaldson C (1998) Helicopters, hearts and hips: using willingness to pay to set priorities for public sector health care programmes. Soc Sci Med 46:1–12CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Gyrd-Hansen D (2004) Investigating the social value of health changes. J Health Econ 23:1101–1116PubMed Gyrd-Hansen D (2004) Investigating the social value of health changes. J Health Econ 23:1101–1116PubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Viney R, Savage E, Louviere J (2005) Empirical investigation of experimental design properties of discrete choice experiments in health care. Health Econ (in press) Viney R, Savage E, Louviere J (2005) Empirical investigation of experimental design properties of discrete choice experiments in health care. Health Econ (in press)
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Hall J, Kenny P, King M, Louviere J, Viney R, Yeoh A (2002) Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination. Health Econ 11:457–465CrossRefPubMed Hall J, Kenny P, King M, Louviere J, Viney R, Yeoh A (2002) Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination. Health Econ 11:457–465CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Lancsar E (2002) Deriving welfare measures from stated preference discrete choice modelling experiments. CHERE discussion paper no 48. Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology: Sydney Lancsar E (2002) Deriving welfare measures from stated preference discrete choice modelling experiments. CHERE discussion paper no 48. Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University of Technology: Sydney
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Scott A, Watson MS, Ross S (2003) Eliciting preferences of the community for out of hours care provided by general practitioners: a stated preference discrete choice experiment. Soc Sci Med 56:803–814CrossRefPubMed Scott A, Watson MS, Ross S (2003) Eliciting preferences of the community for out of hours care provided by general practitioners: a stated preference discrete choice experiment. Soc Sci Med 56:803–814CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Jan S, Mooney G, Ryan M, Bruggemann K, Alexander K (2000) The use of conjoint analysis to elicit community preferences in public health research: a case study of hospital services in South Australia. Aust NZ J Public Health 24:64–70 Jan S, Mooney G, Ryan M, Bruggemann K, Alexander K (2000) The use of conjoint analysis to elicit community preferences in public health research: a case study of hospital services in South Australia. Aust NZ J Public Health 24:64–70
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Ryan M, McIntosh E, Dean T, Old P (2000) Trade-offs between location and waiting times in the provision of health care: the case of elective surgery on the Isle of Wight. J Public Health Med 22:202–210CrossRefPubMed Ryan M, McIntosh E, Dean T, Old P (2000) Trade-offs between location and waiting times in the provision of health care: the case of elective surgery on the Isle of Wight. J Public Health Med 22:202–210CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Lancsar E, Hall J, King M, Kenny P, Louviere J, Fiebig D et al (2003) Repeated discrete choice experiments nested within a randomised cross-over trial: investigating patient preferences for preventive asthma medication. Presented at the 4th World Congress of the International Health Economics Association. San Francisco Lancsar E, Hall J, King M, Kenny P, Louviere J, Fiebig D et al (2003) Repeated discrete choice experiments nested within a randomised cross-over trial: investigating patient preferences for preventive asthma medication. Presented at the 4th World Congress of the International Health Economics Association. San Francisco
14.
Zurück zum Zitat De Abreu Lourenco R, Hall J, Viney R, Haas M, King M, Kenny P (2000) Economic evaluation of genetic screening using choice modelling. In: Bridges J (ed) Health and economics: 2001. Proceedings of the 22rd Australian Conference of Health Economists. ASHSA: Brisbane De Abreu Lourenco R, Hall J, Viney R, Haas M, King M, Kenny P (2000) Economic evaluation of genetic screening using choice modelling. In: Bridges J (ed) Health and economics: 2001. Proceedings of the 22rd Australian Conference of Health Economists. ASHSA: Brisbane
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Louviere J, Burgess l, Street D, Marley A (2004) Modeling the choices of single individuals by combining efficient choice experiment designs with extra preference information. Centre for the Study of Choice (CenSoc) Working Paper No. 04-005, University of Technology, SydneyCrossRef Louviere J, Burgess l, Street D, Marley A (2004) Modeling the choices of single individuals by combining efficient choice experiment designs with extra preference information. Centre for the Study of Choice (CenSoc) Working Paper No. 04-005, University of Technology, SydneyCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Burgess L, Street DJ (2005) Optimal designs for choice experiments with asymmetric attributes. J Stat Planning Inference (in press) Burgess L, Street DJ (2005) Optimal designs for choice experiments with asymmetric attributes. J Stat Planning Inference (in press)
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Swait J (2001) A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs. Transportation Res B Methodolog 35:903–928CrossRef Swait J (2001) A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs. Transportation Res B Methodolog 35:903–928CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Louviere J, Street D, Carson R, Ainslie A, Deshazo JR, Cameron T et al (2002) Dissecting the random component of utility. Marketing Lett 13:177–193CrossRef Louviere J, Street D, Carson R, Ainslie A, Deshazo JR, Cameron T et al (2002) Dissecting the random component of utility. Marketing Lett 13:177–193CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Mooney G (1994) Key issues in health economics. Harvester Wheatsheaf: London Mooney G (1994) Key issues in health economics. Harvester Wheatsheaf: London
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Donaldson C, Shackley P (1997) Does “process utility” exist? A case study of willingness to pay for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Soc Sci Med 44:699–707CrossRefPubMed Donaldson C, Shackley P (1997) Does “process utility” exist? A case study of willingness to pay for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Soc Sci Med 44:699–707CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat McFadden D (1973) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P (ed) Frontiers of econometrics. Academic: New York, pp 105–142 McFadden D (1973) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P (ed) Frontiers of econometrics. Academic: New York, pp 105–142
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Lancaster K (1966) A new approach to consumer theory. J Political Econ 74:132–157CrossRef Lancaster K (1966) A new approach to consumer theory. J Political Econ 74:132–157CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Discrete choice experiments in health economics
Distinguishing between the method and its application
verfasst von
Emily Lancsar
Cam Donaldson
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2005
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
The European Journal of Health Economics / Ausgabe 4/2005
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Elektronische ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-005-0304-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2005

The European Journal of Health Economics 4/2005 Zur Ausgabe