Complex Valuation: Applying Ideas from the Complex Intervention Framework to Valuation of a New Measure for End-of-Life Care

Joanna Coast (), Elisabeth Huynh (), Philip Kinghorn and Terry Flynn
Additional contact information
Joanna Coast: University of Bristol
Philip Kinghorn: University of Bristol
Terry Flynn: TF Choices Ltd

PharmacoEconomics, 2016, vol. 34, issue 5, No 7, 499-508

Abstract: Abstract Background The UK Medical Research Council approach to evaluating complex interventions moves through development, feasibility, piloting, evaluation and implementation in an iterative manner. This approach might be useful as a conceptual process underlying complex valuation tasks. Objective The objective of the study was to explore the applicability of such a framework using a single case study (valuing the ICECAP-Supportive Care Measure) and considering three key uncertainties: the number of response categories for the measure; experimental design; and the potential for using slightly different variants of the measure with the same value set. Methods Three on-line pilot studies (n = 204, n = 100, n = 102) were undertaken during 2012 and 2013 with adults from the UK general population. Each used variants of discrete choice and best-worst scaling tasks; respondents were randomly allocated to different groups to allow exploration of the number of levels for the instrument (four or five), optimal experimental design and the values for alternative wording around prognosis. Conditional logit regression models were used in the analysis and variance scale factors were explored. Results The five-level version of the measure seemed to result in simplifying heuristics. Plotting the variance scale factors suggested that best-worst scaling answers were approximately four times more consistent than the discrete choice answers. The likelihood ratio test indicated there was virtually no difference in values between the differently worded versions. Conclusion Rigorous piloting can improve the design of valuation studies. Thinking in terms of a ‘complex valuation framework’ may emphasise the importance of conducting and funding such rigorous pilots.

Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-015-0365-9 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:5:d:10.1007_s40273-015-0365-9

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

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-015-0365-9

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 () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().