IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v23y2025i2d10.1007_s40258-024-00929-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Direct Impact of Death on Discrete Choice Experiment Utilities

Author

Listed:
  • Hossein Ameri

    (University of Montreal
    CR-IUSMM, CIUSSS de l’Est de l’Île de Montréal)

  • Thomas G. Poder

    (University of Montreal
    CR-IUSMM, CIUSSS de l’Est de l’Île de Montréal)

Abstract

Background The dead state can affect the value sets derived from discrete choice experiments (DCEs). Our aim was to empirically assess the direct impact of the immediate death state on health utilities using discrete choice experiment with time (DCETTO). Methods A sample of the general population in Quebec, Canada, completed two approaches: DCETTO followed by a best-worst scaling with time (BWSTTO) (hereafter referred to as DCEBWS), versus DCETTO followed by the dominated option and the immediate death state (hereafter referred to as DCEDOD), both designed with the SF-6Dv2. In DCEBWS, all participants first completed 10 DCETTO choices (i.e., option A vs B), followed by 3 BWSTTO. In DCEDOD, the same participants first completed the same 10 DCETTO choices, followed by a repeated choice between the dominated option (i.e., A or B) and the immediate death state. A conditional logit model was used to estimate value sets. The performance of models was assessed using goodness of fit using Bayesian information criterion, parameters’ logical consistency, and levels’ significance. The direct impact of the death state on DCE latent utilities was evaluated by examining the magnitude of coefficients, assessing the agreement among the value sets estimated by DCETTO with DCEBWS and with DCEDOD using Bland-Altman plots, the proportion of worst-than-dead (WTD) health states, and analyzing the range of estimated values. Results From 398 participants, a total of 348 participants were included for final analysis. The number of parameters with illogical consistency and non-significant coefficients was lower in DCEBWS. The observed consistency in the relative importance of dimensions across all approaches suggests a stable and reliable ranking. The utility range for DCEDOD (− 0.921 to 1) was narrower than for DCETTO (− 1.578 to 1) and DCEBWS (− 1.150 to 1). The DCEDOD estimated a lower percentage of WTD health states (20.01 %) compared to DCETTO (47.19 %) and DCEBWS (33.73 %). The agreement between DCETTO and DCEBWS was slightly stronger than between DCETTO and DCEDOD, and the mean utility values were higher in DCEDOD than in DCEBWS. Conclusions The inclusion of the immediate death state directly within DCE increased utility values. This increase was higher when the immediate death was included in a sequence within a DCETTO (i.e., DCEDOD) than when it was included in a continuum of DCETTO (i.e., DCEBWS). The use of DCEDOD was potentially better suited to incorporate the dead state into a DCE.

Suggested Citation

  • Hossein Ameri & Thomas G. Poder, 2025. "Assessing the Direct Impact of Death on Discrete Choice Experiment Utilities," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 319-327, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00929-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00929-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-024-00929-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-024-00929-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:23:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00929-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.