Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey

Although literature exists on using qualitative methods to generate potential attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE), there is little on selecting which attributes to include. We present a case study in which a best-worst scaling case 1 (BWS-1) survey was used to guide attribute selection...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Value in health 2021-04, Vol.24 (4), p.575-584
Hauptverfasser: Webb, Edward J.D., Meads, David, Lynch, Yvonne, Judge, Simon, Randall, Nicola, Goldbart, Juliet, Meredith, Stuart, Moulam, Liz, Hess, Stephane, Murray, Janice
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 584
container_issue 4
container_start_page 575
container_title Value in health
container_volume 24
creator Webb, Edward J.D.
Meads, David
Lynch, Yvonne
Judge, Simon
Randall, Nicola
Goldbart, Juliet
Meredith, Stuart
Moulam, Liz
Hess, Stephane
Murray, Janice
description Although literature exists on using qualitative methods to generate potential attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE), there is little on selecting which attributes to include. We present a case study in which a best-worst scaling case 1 (BWS-1) survey was used to guide attribute selection for a DCE. The case study’s context was the decision making of professionals around the choice of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems for children with limited natural speech. BWS-1 survey attributes were generated from literature reviews and focus groups. DCE attributes were selected from BWS-1 attributes. The selection criteria were: include mostly important attributes; create coherent descriptions of children and AAC systems; address the project’s research aims; have an appropriate respondent burden. Attributes’ importance was judged using BWS-1 relative importance scores. The BWS-1 survey included 19 child and 18 AAC device/system attributes and was administered to N = 93 AAC professionals. Four child and five device/system attributes were selected for the DCE, administered to N = 155 AAC professionals. In this case study BWS-1 results were useful in DCE attribute selection. Four recommendations are made for future studies: define selection criteria for DCE attributes a priori; consider the impact participant’s perspective will have on BWS-1 and DCE results; clearly define key terminology at the start of the study and refine it as the study progresses to reflect interim findings; BWS will be useful when there is little existing stated preference work on a topic and/or qualitative work is difficult.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.025
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2511897978</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1098301520345125</els_id><sourcerecordid>2511897978</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-35c5c1bb7d12992e0af82d742bdcafbbbdb87f7447cb2fb231df1d69673d95a63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtr3DAURkVpaV79A10EQzfZeKKXLRuySaaTBwS6mJTuKvS4bmU81kSSh-TfV2bSLLLISuLTuZdPB6GvBC8IJvV5v-h3alhQTOdggWn1AR2SivKSC8Y-5jtum5JhUh2goxh7jHHNaPUZHTDWcMxZfYh-X6YUnJ4SFGsYwCTnx6LzoVDFdxdNgPyw_OudgWL1tIXgNjCm4m40Pmx9UMmNfzJ6BTGVv3yIqVgbNczhego7eD5Bnzo1RPjych6jn9erh-Vtef_j5m55eV8aTptUsspUhmgtLKFtSwGrrqFWcKqtUZ3W2upGdIJzYTTtNGXEdsTWbS2YbStVs2N0tt-7Df5xym3kJreHYVAj-ClKWhHStKIVTUa_vUF7P4Uxt5spwUkjOM4U3VMm-BgDdHKb_67CsyRYzvZlL2f7crY_Z9l-Hjp9WT3pDdjXkf-6M3CxByC72DkIMhoHowHrQnYvrXfv7f8H-J-WPA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2517418740</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Webb, Edward J.D. ; Meads, David ; Lynch, Yvonne ; Judge, Simon ; Randall, Nicola ; Goldbart, Juliet ; Meredith, Stuart ; Moulam, Liz ; Hess, Stephane ; Murray, Janice</creator><creatorcontrib>Webb, Edward J.D. ; Meads, David ; Lynch, Yvonne ; Judge, Simon ; Randall, Nicola ; Goldbart, Juliet ; Meredith, Stuart ; Moulam, Liz ; Hess, Stephane ; Murray, Janice</creatorcontrib><description>Although literature exists on using qualitative methods to generate potential attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE), there is little on selecting which attributes to include. We present a case study in which a best-worst scaling case 1 (BWS-1) survey was used to guide attribute selection for a DCE. The case study’s context was the decision making of professionals around the choice of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems for children with limited natural speech. BWS-1 survey attributes were generated from literature reviews and focus groups. DCE attributes were selected from BWS-1 attributes. The selection criteria were: include mostly important attributes; create coherent descriptions of children and AAC systems; address the project’s research aims; have an appropriate respondent burden. Attributes’ importance was judged using BWS-1 relative importance scores. The BWS-1 survey included 19 child and 18 AAC device/system attributes and was administered to N = 93 AAC professionals. Four child and five device/system attributes were selected for the DCE, administered to N = 155 AAC professionals. In this case study BWS-1 results were useful in DCE attribute selection. Four recommendations are made for future studies: define selection criteria for DCE attributes a priori; consider the impact participant’s perspective will have on BWS-1 and DCE results; clearly define key terminology at the start of the study and refine it as the study progresses to reflect interim findings; BWS will be useful when there is little existing stated preference work on a topic and/or qualitative work is difficult.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1098-3015</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1524-4733</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.025</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33840436</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>attribute development ; attribute selection ; Attributes ; Augmentative and alternative communication ; best-worst scaling ; Case studies ; Children ; Children &amp; youth ; Decision making ; Discrete choice ; discrete choice experiment ; Discrete element method ; Literature reviews ; methodology ; Polls &amp; surveys ; Qualitative research ; Selection criteria ; Speech ; Terminology</subject><ispartof>Value in health, 2021-04, Vol.24 (4), p.575-584</ispartof><rights>2020 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Apr 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-35c5c1bb7d12992e0af82d742bdcafbbbdb87f7447cb2fb231df1d69673d95a63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-35c5c1bb7d12992e0af82d742bdcafbbbdb87f7447cb2fb231df1d69673d95a63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.025$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,30999,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33840436$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Webb, Edward J.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meads, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lynch, Yvonne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Judge, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Randall, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldbart, Juliet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meredith, Stuart</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moulam, Liz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hess, Stephane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray, Janice</creatorcontrib><title>Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey</title><title>Value in health</title><addtitle>Value Health</addtitle><description>Although literature exists on using qualitative methods to generate potential attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE), there is little on selecting which attributes to include. We present a case study in which a best-worst scaling case 1 (BWS-1) survey was used to guide attribute selection for a DCE. The case study’s context was the decision making of professionals around the choice of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems for children with limited natural speech. BWS-1 survey attributes were generated from literature reviews and focus groups. DCE attributes were selected from BWS-1 attributes. The selection criteria were: include mostly important attributes; create coherent descriptions of children and AAC systems; address the project’s research aims; have an appropriate respondent burden. Attributes’ importance was judged using BWS-1 relative importance scores. The BWS-1 survey included 19 child and 18 AAC device/system attributes and was administered to N = 93 AAC professionals. Four child and five device/system attributes were selected for the DCE, administered to N = 155 AAC professionals. In this case study BWS-1 results were useful in DCE attribute selection. Four recommendations are made for future studies: define selection criteria for DCE attributes a priori; consider the impact participant’s perspective will have on BWS-1 and DCE results; clearly define key terminology at the start of the study and refine it as the study progresses to reflect interim findings; BWS will be useful when there is little existing stated preference work on a topic and/or qualitative work is difficult.</description><subject>attribute development</subject><subject>attribute selection</subject><subject>Attributes</subject><subject>Augmentative and alternative communication</subject><subject>best-worst scaling</subject><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Children &amp; youth</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Discrete choice</subject><subject>discrete choice experiment</subject><subject>Discrete element method</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>methodology</subject><subject>Polls &amp; surveys</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Selection criteria</subject><subject>Speech</subject><subject>Terminology</subject><issn>1098-3015</issn><issn>1524-4733</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtr3DAURkVpaV79A10EQzfZeKKXLRuySaaTBwS6mJTuKvS4bmU81kSSh-TfV2bSLLLISuLTuZdPB6GvBC8IJvV5v-h3alhQTOdggWn1AR2SivKSC8Y-5jtum5JhUh2goxh7jHHNaPUZHTDWcMxZfYh-X6YUnJ4SFGsYwCTnx6LzoVDFdxdNgPyw_OudgWL1tIXgNjCm4m40Pmx9UMmNfzJ6BTGVv3yIqVgbNczhego7eD5Bnzo1RPjych6jn9erh-Vtef_j5m55eV8aTptUsspUhmgtLKFtSwGrrqFWcKqtUZ3W2upGdIJzYTTtNGXEdsTWbS2YbStVs2N0tt-7Df5xym3kJreHYVAj-ClKWhHStKIVTUa_vUF7P4Uxt5spwUkjOM4U3VMm-BgDdHKb_67CsyRYzvZlL2f7crY_Z9l-Hjp9WT3pDdjXkf-6M3CxByC72DkIMhoHowHrQnYvrXfv7f8H-J-WPA</recordid><startdate>202104</startdate><enddate>202104</enddate><creator>Webb, Edward J.D.</creator><creator>Meads, David</creator><creator>Lynch, Yvonne</creator><creator>Judge, Simon</creator><creator>Randall, Nicola</creator><creator>Goldbart, Juliet</creator><creator>Meredith, Stuart</creator><creator>Moulam, Liz</creator><creator>Hess, Stephane</creator><creator>Murray, Janice</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202104</creationdate><title>Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey</title><author>Webb, Edward J.D. ; Meads, David ; Lynch, Yvonne ; Judge, Simon ; Randall, Nicola ; Goldbart, Juliet ; Meredith, Stuart ; Moulam, Liz ; Hess, Stephane ; Murray, Janice</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c428t-35c5c1bb7d12992e0af82d742bdcafbbbdb87f7447cb2fb231df1d69673d95a63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>attribute development</topic><topic>attribute selection</topic><topic>Attributes</topic><topic>Augmentative and alternative communication</topic><topic>best-worst scaling</topic><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Children &amp; youth</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Discrete choice</topic><topic>discrete choice experiment</topic><topic>Discrete element method</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>methodology</topic><topic>Polls &amp; surveys</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Selection criteria</topic><topic>Speech</topic><topic>Terminology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Webb, Edward J.D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meads, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lynch, Yvonne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Judge, Simon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Randall, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldbart, Juliet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meredith, Stuart</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moulam, Liz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hess, Stephane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murray, Janice</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Value in health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Webb, Edward J.D.</au><au>Meads, David</au><au>Lynch, Yvonne</au><au>Judge, Simon</au><au>Randall, Nicola</au><au>Goldbart, Juliet</au><au>Meredith, Stuart</au><au>Moulam, Liz</au><au>Hess, Stephane</au><au>Murray, Janice</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey</atitle><jtitle>Value in health</jtitle><addtitle>Value Health</addtitle><date>2021-04</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>575</spage><epage>584</epage><pages>575-584</pages><issn>1098-3015</issn><eissn>1524-4733</eissn><abstract>Although literature exists on using qualitative methods to generate potential attributes for a discrete choice experiment (DCE), there is little on selecting which attributes to include. We present a case study in which a best-worst scaling case 1 (BWS-1) survey was used to guide attribute selection for a DCE. The case study’s context was the decision making of professionals around the choice of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems for children with limited natural speech. BWS-1 survey attributes were generated from literature reviews and focus groups. DCE attributes were selected from BWS-1 attributes. The selection criteria were: include mostly important attributes; create coherent descriptions of children and AAC systems; address the project’s research aims; have an appropriate respondent burden. Attributes’ importance was judged using BWS-1 relative importance scores. The BWS-1 survey included 19 child and 18 AAC device/system attributes and was administered to N = 93 AAC professionals. Four child and five device/system attributes were selected for the DCE, administered to N = 155 AAC professionals. In this case study BWS-1 results were useful in DCE attribute selection. Four recommendations are made for future studies: define selection criteria for DCE attributes a priori; consider the impact participant’s perspective will have on BWS-1 and DCE results; clearly define key terminology at the start of the study and refine it as the study progresses to reflect interim findings; BWS will be useful when there is little existing stated preference work on a topic and/or qualitative work is difficult.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>33840436</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.025</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1098-3015
ispartof Value in health, 2021-04, Vol.24 (4), p.575-584
issn 1098-3015
1524-4733
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2511897978
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects attribute development
attribute selection
Attributes
Augmentative and alternative communication
best-worst scaling
Case studies
Children
Children & youth
Decision making
Discrete choice
discrete choice experiment
Discrete element method
Literature reviews
methodology
Polls & surveys
Qualitative research
Selection criteria
Speech
Terminology
title Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T21%3A03%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Attribute%20Selection%20for%20a%20Discrete%20Choice%20Experiment%20Incorporating%20a%20Best-Worst%20Scaling%20Survey&rft.jtitle=Value%20in%20health&rft.au=Webb,%20Edward%20J.D.&rft.date=2021-04&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=575&rft.epage=584&rft.pages=575-584&rft.issn=1098-3015&rft.eissn=1524-4733&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.025&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2511897978%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2517418740&rft_id=info:pmid/33840436&rft_els_id=S1098301520345125&rfr_iscdi=true