Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States: A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States : A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments. / Broderick, Lynne; Bjørner, Jakob B.; Lauher-Charest, Miranda; White, Michelle K.; Kosinski, Mark; Mulhern, Brendan; Brazier, John.

I: Value in Health, Bind 25, Nr. 12, 2022, s. 2034-2043.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Broderick, L, Bjørner, JB, Lauher-Charest, M, White, MK, Kosinski, M, Mulhern, B & Brazier, J 2022, 'Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States: A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments', Value in Health, bind 25, nr. 12, s. 2034-2043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.018

APA

Broderick, L., Bjørner, J. B., Lauher-Charest, M., White, M. K., Kosinski, M., Mulhern, B., & Brazier, J. (2022). Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States: A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments. Value in Health, 25(12), 2034-2043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.018

Vancouver

Broderick L, Bjørner JB, Lauher-Charest M, White MK, Kosinski M, Mulhern B o.a. Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States: A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments. Value in Health. 2022;25(12):2034-2043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.018

Author

Broderick, Lynne ; Bjørner, Jakob B. ; Lauher-Charest, Miranda ; White, Michelle K. ; Kosinski, Mark ; Mulhern, Brendan ; Brazier, John. / Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States : A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments. I: Value in Health. 2022 ; Bind 25, Nr. 12. s. 2034-2043.

Bibtex

@article{7587bab00c2b4d9e9d5a307e1c6ae744,
title = "Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States: A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments",
abstract = "Objective: This study aimed to gain insight into decision-making strategies individuals used when evaluating pairs of SF-6Dv2 health states in discrete choice experiments (DCEs). Methods: This qualitative, cross-sectional, noninterventional study asked participants to use a think-aloud approach to compare SF-6Dv2 health states in DCEs. Thematic analysis focused on comprehension and cognitive strategies used to compare health states and make decisions. Results: Participants (N = 40) used 3 main strategies when completing DCEs: (1) trading, (2) reinterpretation, and (3) relying on previous experience. Trading was the most common strategy, used by everyone at least once, and involved prioritizing key attributes, such as preferring a health state with significant depression but no bodily pain. Reinterpretation was used by 17 participants and involved reconstructing health states by changing underlying assumptions (eg, rationalizing selecting a health state with significant pain because they could take pain medications). Finally, some (n = 13) relied on previous experience when making decisions on some choice tasks. Participants with experience dealing with pain, for instance, prioritized health states with the least impact in this dimension. Conclusions: Qualitatively evaluating the decision-making strategies used in DCEs allows researchers to evaluate whether the tasks and attributes are interpreted accurately. The findings from this study add to the understanding of the generation of SF-6Dv2 health utility weights and the validity of these weights (e.g., reinterpreting health states could undermine the validity of DCEs and utility weights), and the overall usefulness of the SF-6Dv2. The methodology described in this study can and should be carried forth in valuing other health utility measures, not just the SF-6Dv2.",
keywords = "discrete choice experiment, health state utility, qualitative, SF-6Dv2, think-aloud",
author = "Lynne Broderick and Bj{\o}rner, {Jakob B.} and Miranda Lauher-Charest and White, {Michelle K.} and Mark Kosinski and Brendan Mulhern and John Brazier",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022",
year = "2022",
doi = "10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.018",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "2034--2043",
journal = "Value in Health",
issn = "1098-3015",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "12",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Deciding Between SF-6Dv2 Health States

T2 - A Think-Aloud Study of Decision-Making Strategies Used in Discrete Choice Experiments

AU - Broderick, Lynne

AU - Bjørner, Jakob B.

AU - Lauher-Charest, Miranda

AU - White, Michelle K.

AU - Kosinski, Mark

AU - Mulhern, Brendan

AU - Brazier, John

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2022

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - Objective: This study aimed to gain insight into decision-making strategies individuals used when evaluating pairs of SF-6Dv2 health states in discrete choice experiments (DCEs). Methods: This qualitative, cross-sectional, noninterventional study asked participants to use a think-aloud approach to compare SF-6Dv2 health states in DCEs. Thematic analysis focused on comprehension and cognitive strategies used to compare health states and make decisions. Results: Participants (N = 40) used 3 main strategies when completing DCEs: (1) trading, (2) reinterpretation, and (3) relying on previous experience. Trading was the most common strategy, used by everyone at least once, and involved prioritizing key attributes, such as preferring a health state with significant depression but no bodily pain. Reinterpretation was used by 17 participants and involved reconstructing health states by changing underlying assumptions (eg, rationalizing selecting a health state with significant pain because they could take pain medications). Finally, some (n = 13) relied on previous experience when making decisions on some choice tasks. Participants with experience dealing with pain, for instance, prioritized health states with the least impact in this dimension. Conclusions: Qualitatively evaluating the decision-making strategies used in DCEs allows researchers to evaluate whether the tasks and attributes are interpreted accurately. The findings from this study add to the understanding of the generation of SF-6Dv2 health utility weights and the validity of these weights (e.g., reinterpreting health states could undermine the validity of DCEs and utility weights), and the overall usefulness of the SF-6Dv2. The methodology described in this study can and should be carried forth in valuing other health utility measures, not just the SF-6Dv2.

AB - Objective: This study aimed to gain insight into decision-making strategies individuals used when evaluating pairs of SF-6Dv2 health states in discrete choice experiments (DCEs). Methods: This qualitative, cross-sectional, noninterventional study asked participants to use a think-aloud approach to compare SF-6Dv2 health states in DCEs. Thematic analysis focused on comprehension and cognitive strategies used to compare health states and make decisions. Results: Participants (N = 40) used 3 main strategies when completing DCEs: (1) trading, (2) reinterpretation, and (3) relying on previous experience. Trading was the most common strategy, used by everyone at least once, and involved prioritizing key attributes, such as preferring a health state with significant depression but no bodily pain. Reinterpretation was used by 17 participants and involved reconstructing health states by changing underlying assumptions (eg, rationalizing selecting a health state with significant pain because they could take pain medications). Finally, some (n = 13) relied on previous experience when making decisions on some choice tasks. Participants with experience dealing with pain, for instance, prioritized health states with the least impact in this dimension. Conclusions: Qualitatively evaluating the decision-making strategies used in DCEs allows researchers to evaluate whether the tasks and attributes are interpreted accurately. The findings from this study add to the understanding of the generation of SF-6Dv2 health utility weights and the validity of these weights (e.g., reinterpreting health states could undermine the validity of DCEs and utility weights), and the overall usefulness of the SF-6Dv2. The methodology described in this study can and should be carried forth in valuing other health utility measures, not just the SF-6Dv2.

KW - discrete choice experiment

KW - health state utility

KW - qualitative

KW - SF-6Dv2

KW - think-aloud

U2 - 10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.018

DO - 10.1016/j.jval.2022.07.018

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 36064513

AN - SCOPUS:85138539828

VL - 25

SP - 2034

EP - 2043

JO - Value in Health

JF - Value in Health

SN - 1098-3015

IS - 12

ER -

ID: 345414267