EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Using Best–Worst Scaling to Investigate Preferences in Health Care

Kei Long Cheung (), Ben F. M. Wijnen, Ilene L. Hollin, Ellen M. Janssen, John F. Bridges, Silvia M. A. A. Evers and Mickael Hiligsmann
Additional contact information
Kei Long Cheung: Maastricht University
Ben F. M. Wijnen: Maastricht University
Ilene L. Hollin: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Ellen M. Janssen: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
John F. Bridges: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Silvia M. A. A. Evers: Maastricht University
Mickael Hiligsmann: Maastricht University

PharmacoEconomics, 2016, vol. 34, issue 12, 1195-1209

Abstract: Abstract Introduction Best–worst scaling (BWS) is becoming increasingly popular to elicit preferences in health care. However, little is known about current practice and trends in the use of BWS in health care. This study aimed to identify, review and critically appraise BWS in health care, and to identify trends over time in key aspects of BWS. Methods A systematic review was conducted, using Medline (via Pubmed) and EMBASE to identify all English-language BWS studies published up until April 2016. Using a predefined extraction form, two reviewers independently selected articles and critically appraised the study quality, using the Purpose, Respondents, Explanation, Findings, Significance (PREFS) checklist. Trends over time periods (≤2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015) were assessed further. Results A total of 62 BWS studies were identified, of which 26 were BWS object case studies, 29 were BWS profile case studies and seven were BWS multi-profile case studies. About two thirds of the studies were performed in the last 2 years. Decreasing sample sizes and decreasing numbers of factors in BWS object case studies, as well as use of less complicated analytical methods, were observed in recent studies. The quality of the BWS studies was generally acceptable according to the PREFS checklist, except that most studies did not indicate whether the responders were similar to the non-responders. Conclusion Use of BWS object case and BWS profile case has drastically increased in health care, especially in the last 2 years. In contrast with previous discrete-choice experiment reviews, there is increasing use of less sophisticated analytical methods.

Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1) Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-016-0429-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:pharme:v:34:y:2016:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-016-0429-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla ().

 
Page updated 2019-04-09
Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:34:y:2016:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-016-0429-5