Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: An overview
Best-worst scaling (BWS), also known as maximum-difference scaling, is a multiattribute approach to measuring preferences. BWS aims at the analysis of preferences regarding a set of attributes, their levels or alternatives. It is a stated-preference method based on the assumption that respondents ar...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Health economics review 2016-01, Vol.6 (2), p.1-9, Article 2 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 9 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 1 |
| container_title | Health economics review |
| container_volume | 6 |
| creator | Mühlbacher, Axel C Kaczynski, Anika Zweifel, Peter Johnson, F. Reed |
| description | Best-worst scaling (BWS), also known as maximum-difference scaling, is a multiattribute approach to measuring preferences. BWS aims at the analysis of preferences regarding a set of attributes, their levels or alternatives. It is a stated-preference method based on the assumption that respondents are capable of making judgments regarding the best and the worst (or the most and least important, respectively) out of three or more elements of a choiceset. As is true of discrete choice experiments (DCE) generally, BWS avoids the known weaknesses of rating and ranking scales while holding the promise of generating additional information by making respondents choose twice, namely the best as well as the worst criteria. A systematic literature review found 53 BWS applications in health and healthcare. This article expounds possibilities of application, the underlying theoretical concepts and the implementation of BWS in its three variants: "object case", "profile case", "multiprofile case". This paper contains a survey of BWS methods and revolves around study design, experimental design, and data analysis. Moreover the article discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the three types of BWS distinguished and offered an outlook. A companion paper focuses on special issues of theory and statistical inference confronting BWS in preference measurement. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1186/s13561-015-0079-x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4705077</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3914654831</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462x-cb4f1c05144b9c57a33778542e79329ee8cad131b6a154c43dea55d39152d7873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhiMEolXpD-AAWOLCJeDxR-xwQKqqUpAqcYGz5TiT3VRZe7GT7fLvcZTtassBX8b2PDOe129RvAb6EUBXnxJwWUFJQZaUqrrcPyvOGdRQQl3D85P9WXGZ0j3Nq5LApHpZnLFKCV7x6rzobvZbjP0G_WgHskGbpojziYSObCN2GNE7TKT3ZI12GNfE-vawdTYimVLvV6TBNJYPIaaRJGeHfPWZXHkSdhh3PT68Kl50dkh4eYgXxa-vNz-vv5V3P26_X1_dlU5UbF-6RnTgqAQhmtpJZTlXSkvBUNWc1Yja2RY4NJUFKZzgLVopW16DZK3Sil8UX5a-26nZYOuykGgHs80Kbfxjgu3N04zv12YVdkYoKqmaG3w4NIjh95RFmU2fHA6D9RimZEBVVCsAqjP6_h_0PkzRZ3mZkkLUUDGRKVgoF0NK-UOPwwA1s5FmMdJkI81spNnnmrenKo4Vj7Zl4N0CoAu-T0dAS60105xngi1Eyjm_wngy3H_effOk7RzSGKIBSUXN-F8GGr5w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1754491624</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: An overview</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>SpringerLink (Online service)</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Mühlbacher, Axel C ; Kaczynski, Anika ; Zweifel, Peter ; Johnson, F. Reed</creator><creatorcontrib>Mühlbacher, Axel C ; Kaczynski, Anika ; Zweifel, Peter ; Johnson, F. Reed</creatorcontrib><description>Best-worst scaling (BWS), also known as maximum-difference scaling, is a multiattribute approach to measuring preferences. BWS aims at the analysis of preferences regarding a set of attributes, their levels or alternatives. It is a stated-preference method based on the assumption that respondents are capable of making judgments regarding the best and the worst (or the most and least important, respectively) out of three or more elements of a choiceset. As is true of discrete choice experiments (DCE) generally, BWS avoids the known weaknesses of rating and ranking scales while holding the promise of generating additional information by making respondents choose twice, namely the best as well as the worst criteria. A systematic literature review found 53 BWS applications in health and healthcare. This article expounds possibilities of application, the underlying theoretical concepts and the implementation of BWS in its three variants: "object case", "profile case", "multiprofile case". This paper contains a survey of BWS methods and revolves around study design, experimental design, and data analysis. Moreover the article discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the three types of BWS distinguished and offered an outlook. A companion paper focuses on special issues of theory and statistical inference confronting BWS in preference measurement.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2191-1991</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2191-1991</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/s13561-015-0079-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26743636</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Heidelberg: Springer</publisher><subject>Activities of daily living ; Best-worst scaling ; BWS ; Data analysis ; Decision making ; Economic models ; Economic statistics ; Economic theory ; Experimental measurement ; Experiments ; Health care industry ; Health Care Management ; Health Economics ; Health Services Research ; Healthcare decision making ; Literature reviews ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Patient preferences ; Patients ; Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes ; Polls & surveys ; Preferences ; Public Finance ; Public Health ; Ratings & rankings ; Statistical inference ; Studies ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Health economics review, 2016-01, Vol.6 (2), p.1-9, Article 2</ispartof><rights>Mühlbacher et al. 2016</rights><rights>Health Economics Review is a copyright of Springer, 2016.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462x-cb4f1c05144b9c57a33778542e79329ee8cad131b6a154c43dea55d39152d7873</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c462x-cb4f1c05144b9c57a33778542e79329ee8cad131b6a154c43dea55d39152d7873</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4705077/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4705077/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27924,27925,41120,41488,42189,42557,51319,51576,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26743636$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mühlbacher, Axel C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaczynski, Anika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zweifel, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, F. Reed</creatorcontrib><title>Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: An overview</title><title>Health economics review</title><addtitle>Health Econ Rev</addtitle><addtitle>Health Econ Rev</addtitle><description>Best-worst scaling (BWS), also known as maximum-difference scaling, is a multiattribute approach to measuring preferences. BWS aims at the analysis of preferences regarding a set of attributes, their levels or alternatives. It is a stated-preference method based on the assumption that respondents are capable of making judgments regarding the best and the worst (or the most and least important, respectively) out of three or more elements of a choiceset. As is true of discrete choice experiments (DCE) generally, BWS avoids the known weaknesses of rating and ranking scales while holding the promise of generating additional information by making respondents choose twice, namely the best as well as the worst criteria. A systematic literature review found 53 BWS applications in health and healthcare. This article expounds possibilities of application, the underlying theoretical concepts and the implementation of BWS in its three variants: "object case", "profile case", "multiprofile case". This paper contains a survey of BWS methods and revolves around study design, experimental design, and data analysis. Moreover the article discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the three types of BWS distinguished and offered an outlook. A companion paper focuses on special issues of theory and statistical inference confronting BWS in preference measurement.</description><subject>Activities of daily living</subject><subject>Best-worst scaling</subject><subject>BWS</subject><subject>Data analysis</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Economic models</subject><subject>Economic statistics</subject><subject>Economic theory</subject><subject>Experimental measurement</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Health care industry</subject><subject>Health Care Management</subject><subject>Health Economics</subject><subject>Health Services Research</subject><subject>Healthcare decision making</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Patient preferences</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Preferences</subject><subject>Public Finance</subject><subject>Public Health</subject><subject>Ratings & rankings</subject><subject>Statistical inference</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>2191-1991</issn><issn>2191-1991</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1v1DAQhiMEolXpD-AAWOLCJeDxR-xwQKqqUpAqcYGz5TiT3VRZe7GT7fLvcZTtassBX8b2PDOe129RvAb6EUBXnxJwWUFJQZaUqrrcPyvOGdRQQl3D85P9WXGZ0j3Nq5LApHpZnLFKCV7x6rzobvZbjP0G_WgHskGbpojziYSObCN2GNE7TKT3ZI12GNfE-vawdTYimVLvV6TBNJYPIaaRJGeHfPWZXHkSdhh3PT68Kl50dkh4eYgXxa-vNz-vv5V3P26_X1_dlU5UbF-6RnTgqAQhmtpJZTlXSkvBUNWc1Yja2RY4NJUFKZzgLVopW16DZK3Sil8UX5a-26nZYOuykGgHs80Kbfxjgu3N04zv12YVdkYoKqmaG3w4NIjh95RFmU2fHA6D9RimZEBVVCsAqjP6_h_0PkzRZ3mZkkLUUDGRKVgoF0NK-UOPwwA1s5FmMdJkI81spNnnmrenKo4Vj7Zl4N0CoAu-T0dAS60105xngi1Eyjm_wngy3H_effOk7RzSGKIBSUXN-F8GGr5w</recordid><startdate>20160108</startdate><enddate>20160108</enddate><creator>Mühlbacher, Axel C</creator><creator>Kaczynski, Anika</creator><creator>Zweifel, Peter</creator><creator>Johnson, F. Reed</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>OT2</scope><scope>C6C</scope><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160108</creationdate><title>Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: An overview</title><author>Mühlbacher, Axel C ; Kaczynski, Anika ; Zweifel, Peter ; Johnson, F. Reed</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c462x-cb4f1c05144b9c57a33778542e79329ee8cad131b6a154c43dea55d39152d7873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Activities of daily living</topic><topic>Best-worst scaling</topic><topic>BWS</topic><topic>Data analysis</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Economic models</topic><topic>Economic statistics</topic><topic>Economic theory</topic><topic>Experimental measurement</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Health care industry</topic><topic>Health Care Management</topic><topic>Health Economics</topic><topic>Health Services Research</topic><topic>Healthcare decision making</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Patient preferences</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Preferences</topic><topic>Public Finance</topic><topic>Public Health</topic><topic>Ratings & rankings</topic><topic>Statistical inference</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mühlbacher, Axel C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaczynski, Anika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zweifel, Peter</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnson, F. Reed</creatorcontrib><collection>EconStor</collection><collection>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</collection><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content (ProQuest)</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Health economics review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mühlbacher, Axel C</au><au>Kaczynski, Anika</au><au>Zweifel, Peter</au><au>Johnson, F. Reed</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: An overview</atitle><jtitle>Health economics review</jtitle><stitle>Health Econ Rev</stitle><addtitle>Health Econ Rev</addtitle><date>2016-01-08</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>6</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>9</epage><pages>1-9</pages><artnum>2</artnum><issn>2191-1991</issn><eissn>2191-1991</eissn><abstract>Best-worst scaling (BWS), also known as maximum-difference scaling, is a multiattribute approach to measuring preferences. BWS aims at the analysis of preferences regarding a set of attributes, their levels or alternatives. It is a stated-preference method based on the assumption that respondents are capable of making judgments regarding the best and the worst (or the most and least important, respectively) out of three or more elements of a choiceset. As is true of discrete choice experiments (DCE) generally, BWS avoids the known weaknesses of rating and ranking scales while holding the promise of generating additional information by making respondents choose twice, namely the best as well as the worst criteria. A systematic literature review found 53 BWS applications in health and healthcare. This article expounds possibilities of application, the underlying theoretical concepts and the implementation of BWS in its three variants: "object case", "profile case", "multiprofile case". This paper contains a survey of BWS methods and revolves around study design, experimental design, and data analysis. Moreover the article discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the three types of BWS distinguished and offered an outlook. A companion paper focuses on special issues of theory and statistical inference confronting BWS in preference measurement.</abstract><cop>Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>26743636</pmid><doi>10.1186/s13561-015-0079-x</doi><tpages>9</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 2191-1991 |
| ispartof | Health economics review, 2016-01, Vol.6 (2), p.1-9, Article 2 |
| issn | 2191-1991 2191-1991 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4705077 |
| source | Open Access: PubMed Central; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; SpringerLink (Online service); PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
| subjects | Activities of daily living Best-worst scaling BWS Data analysis Decision making Economic models Economic statistics Economic theory Experimental measurement Experiments Health care industry Health Care Management Health Economics Health Services Research Healthcare decision making Literature reviews Medicine Medicine & Public Health Patient preferences Patients Pharmacoeconomics and Health Outcomes Polls & surveys Preferences Public Finance Public Health Ratings & rankings Statistical inference Studies Systematic review |
| title | Experimental measurement of preferences in health and healthcare using best-worst scaling: An overview |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T18%3A25%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Experimental%20measurement%20of%20preferences%20in%20health%20and%20healthcare%20using%20best-worst%20scaling:%20An%20overview&rft.jtitle=Health%20economics%20review&rft.au=M%C3%BChlbacher,%20Axel%20C&rft.date=2016-01-08&rft.volume=6&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=9&rft.pages=1-9&rft.artnum=2&rft.issn=2191-1991&rft.eissn=2191-1991&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/s13561-015-0079-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3914654831%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1754491624&rft_id=info:pmid/26743636&rfr_iscdi=true |