1
|
Nouwens SPH, Marceta SM, Bui M, van Dijk DMAH, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, Veldwijk J, van Til JA, de Bekker-Grob EW. The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2025:10.1007/s40273-025-01495-y. [PMID: 40397369 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-025-01495-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/30/2025] [Indexed: 05/22/2025]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Stakeholder preference evaluations are increasingly emphasized in healthcare policy and health technology assessment. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are the most common method for quantifying preferences among patients, the public, and healthcare professionals. While prior reviews (1990-2017) have examined DCE trends, no comprehensive synthesis exists for studies published since 2018. This updated review (2018-2023) provides critical insights into evolving methodologies and global trends in health-related DCEs. METHODS A systematic search (2018-2023) of Medline, Embase, and Web of Science identified relevant studies. Studies were screened for inclusion and data were extracted, including details on DCE design and analysis. To enable trend comparisons, the search strategy and extraction items aligned with previous reviews. RESULTS Of 2663 identified papers, 1279 met the inclusion criteria, reflecting a significant rise in published DCEs over time. DCEs were conducted globally, with a remarkable increase in publications from Asia and Africa compared with previous reviews. Experimental designs and econometric models have advanced, continuing prior trends. Notably, most recent DCEs were administered online. DISCUSSION The rapid growth of DCE applications underscores their importance in health research. While the methodology is advancing rapidly, it is crucial that researchers provide full transparency in reporting their methods, particularly in detailing experimental designs and validity tests, which are too often overlooked. Key recommendations include improving reporting of experimental designs, applying validity tests, following good practices for presenting benefit-risk attributes, and adopting open science practices. Ensuring methodological rigor will maximize the impact and reproducibility of DCE research in health economics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sven Petrus Henricus Nouwens
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Stella Maria Marceta
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Bui
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Daisy Maria Alberta Hendrika van Dijk
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jorien Veldwijk
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Janine Astrid van Til
- Department of Health Technology and Services Research, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Esther Wilhelmina de Bekker-Grob
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wang Y, Ho PJ, Mou L, Li J. Women's preferences for testing to predict breast cancer risk - a discrete choice experiment. J Transl Med 2025; 23:96. [PMID: 39838430 PMCID: PMC11753052 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-025-06119-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/16/2024] [Accepted: 01/08/2025] [Indexed: 01/23/2025] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Risk-based breast cancer screening offers a more targeted and potentially cost-effective approach in cancer detection compared to age-based screening. This study aims to understand women's preferences and willingness for undergoing risk assessment tests. METHODS A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted. Six attributes were selected to construct the DCE questionnaire: one-time cost of the test, methods for reducing late-stage breast cancer, annual breast cancer screening expenses, insurance coverage for early-stage breast cancer, family risk correlation, and risk communication methods. Women aged between 21 and 59 were recruited from Singapore. Latent class analysis was performed. RESULTS Three hundred twenty-eight women were included in the analysis and classified into two classes: test supporters and non-supporters. Both classes prioritised test costs and screening costs. Among non-cost attributes, the potential to reduce late-stage breast cancer diagnosis was the most influential factor. Insurance coverage increased willingness to undergo testing. Risk communication methods were not significant in influencing the decision of undergoing tests. Non-supporters were less inclined to take the test if family risk correlation was high. Younger women, married women, full-time employees, and those with a history of breast disease were more likely to be supporters. Women with a family history of breast cancer were more likely to be non-supporters. CONCLUSIONS Financial incentives play a notable role in increasing the uptake of risk-prediction tests. However, the programme's success depends on understanding and addressing the diverse preferences of women. While cost considerations ranked highly, additional strategies are needed to engage groups that are hesitant, particularly those with a high family risk correlation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yi Wang
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 117549, Republic of Singapore.
| | - Peh Joo Ho
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 117549, Republic of Singapore
- Genome Institute of Singapore (GIS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, 138672, Republic of Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 119228, Republic of Singapore
| | - Langming Mou
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 117549, Republic of Singapore
| | - Jingmei Li
- Genome Institute of Singapore (GIS), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, 138672, Republic of Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, 119228, Republic of Singapore
- National Cancer Centre Singapore, Singapore, 168583, Republic of Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ong C, Cook AR, Tan KK, Wang Y. Advancing Colorectal Cancer Detection With Blood-Based Tests: Qualitative Study and Discrete Choice Experiment to Elicit Population Preferences. JMIR Public Health Surveill 2024; 10:e53200. [PMID: 39018093 PMCID: PMC11292146 DOI: 10.2196/53200] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Revised: 01/29/2024] [Accepted: 05/21/2024] [Indexed: 07/18/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most deadly form of cancer, inducing an estimated 1.9 million incidence cases and 0.9 million deaths worldwide in 2020. Despite the availability of screening tests, their uptake remains suboptimal. However, blood-based tests that look for signs of cancer-specific markers in the body are increasingly available as an alternative for more invasive tests for cancer. Compared with existing tests, the benefits of blood-based tests for CRC include not needing pretest preparation, stool handling, and dietary or medication restrictions. OBJECTIVE This study aims to explore the population's preferences for CRC screening tests, with a focus on blood-based tests, and investigate the factors influencing test uptake. METHODS We used a mixed methods approach, combining semistructured interviews and a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify salient attributes for CRC screening tests. These attributes informed the design of the DCE survey. The DCE data were analyzed using mixed logit and mixed-mixed multinomial logit models. RESULTS Qualitative findings from 30 participants revealed that participants preferred blood-based tests due to their perceived low risk, minimal pain, and ease of sample collection. However, concerns about the test's lower accuracy were also expressed. The DCE survey was completed by 1189 participants. In the mixed logit model, participants demonstrated a stronger preference for blood-based tests over a 2-day stool-based test. The mixed-mixed multinomial logit model identified 2 classes, strong supporters and weak supporters, for CRC screening. Weak supporters, but not strong supporters, had a higher preference for blood-based tests. Women, ethnic Chinese, and people aged 40 to 60 years were more likely to be weak supporters. Both models highlighted the high influence of cost and test sensitivity on participants' preferences. Transitioning from a 2-day stool-based test to a blood-based test, assuming a national screening program at a base price of Singapore $5 (US $3.75), was estimated to have the potential to increase the relative uptake by 5.9% (95% CI 3.6%-8.2%). CONCLUSIONS These findings contribute to our understanding of CRC screening preferences and provide insights into the factors driving test uptake. This study highlights the perceived advantages of blood-based tests and identifies areas of concern regarding their accuracy. Further research is needed to determine the actual increase in uptake rate when blood-based tests are made available.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clarence Ong
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Alex R Cook
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Ker-Kan Tan
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
- Department of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Yi Wang
- Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Helms YB, Stein ML, Hamdiui N, van der Meer A, Ferreira JA, Crutzen R, Timen A, Kretzschmar MEE. Determinants of Dutch public health professionals' intention to use digital contact tracing support tools: A cross-sectional online questionnaire study. PLOS DIGITAL HEALTH 2024; 3:e0000425. [PMID: 38354119 PMCID: PMC10866487 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000425] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/28/2023] [Accepted: 12/02/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2024]
Abstract
Contact tracing (CT) can be a resource intensive task for public health services. To alleviate their workload and potentially accelerate the CT-process, public health professionals (PHPs) may transfer some tasks in the identification, notification, and monitoring of contacts to cases and their contacts themselves, using 'digital contact tracing support tools' (DCTS-tools). In this study, we aimed to identify determinants of PHPs' intention to use DCTS-tools. Between February and April 2022, we performed a cross-sectional online questionnaire study among PHPs involved in CT for COVID-19 in the Netherlands. We built three random forest models to identify determinants of PHPs' intention to use DCTS-tools for the identification, notification, and monitoring of contacts, respectively. The online questionnaire was completed by 641 PHPs. Most respondents had a positive intention towards using DCTS-tools for the identification (64.5%), notification (58%), and monitoring (55.2%) of contacts. Random forest models were able to correctly predict the intention of 81%, 80%, and 81% of respondents to use DCTS-tools for the identification, notification, and monitoring of contacts, respectively. Top-determinants of having a positive intention are the anticipated effect of DCTS-tools on the feasibility and efficiency of CT (speed, workload, difficulty), the degree to which PHPs anticipated that cases and contacts may find it pleasant and may be willing to participate in CT using DCTS-tools, and the degree to which PHPs anticipated that cases and contacts are sufficiently supported in CT when using DCTS-tools. Most PHPs have a positive intention to involve cases and their contacts in the identification, notification, and monitoring stages of the CT-process through DCTS-tools. The identified top-determinants should be prioritized in the (future) development and implementation of DCTS-tools in public health practice. Citizens' perspectives on the use of DCTS-tools should be investigated in future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yannick B. Helms
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Mart L. Stein
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Nora Hamdiui
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Akke van der Meer
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - José A. Ferreira
- Department of Statistics, Informatics and Modelling, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
| | - Rik Crutzen
- Department of Health Promotion, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Aura Timen
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
- Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Mirjam E. E. Kretzschmar
- Centre for Infectious Disease Control (CIb), National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|