IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v7y1998i4p373-378.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care

Author

Listed:
  • Mandy Ryan
  • Emma McIntosh
  • Phil Shackley

Abstract

This paper adds to an increasing literature on methodological questions addressed in the application of conjoint analysis (CA) in health care. Three issues are addressed: ordering effects; internal validity; and internal consistency. The results of an application of CA in a primary care setting provide no evidence that the ordering of scenarios was important. Evidence was found of both internal validity and internal consistency. In addition, individual preferences were found to be determined by experiences, which raise potentially important questions regarding the elicitation and use of such preferences in economic evaluation. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Mandy Ryan & Emma McIntosh & Phil Shackley, 1998. "Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(4), pages 373-378, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:7:y:1998:i:4:p:373-378
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199806)7:4<373::AID-HEC348>3.0.CO;2-J
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199806)7:43.0.CO;2-J
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199806)7:4<373::AID-HEC348>3.0.CO;2-J?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vick, Sandra & Scott, Anthony, 1998. "Agency in health care. Examining patients' preferences for attributes of the doctor-patient relationship," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 587-605, October.
    2. Barnett R. Parker & V. Srinivasan, 1976. "A Consumer Preference Approach to the Planning of Rural Primary Health-Care Facilities," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 991-1025, October.
    3. Carol Propper, 1995. "The Disutility of Time Spent on the United Kingdom's National Health Service Waiting Lists," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(4), pages 677-700.
    4. John Brazier, 1993. "The SF‐36 health survey questionnaire—a tool for economists," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(3), pages 213-215, October.
    5. Yoram Wind & Lawrence K. Spitz, 1976. "Analytical Approach to Marketing Decisions in Health-Care Organizations," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 973-990, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mandy Ryan & Jenny Hughes, 1997. "Using Conjoint Analysis to Assess Women's Preferences for Miscarriage Management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 261-273, May.
    2. Stirling Bryan & Lisa Gold & Rob Sheldon & Martin Buxton, 2000. "Preference measurement using conjoint methods: an empirical investigation of reliability," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(5), pages 385-395, July.
    3. Chiara Seghieri & Alessandro Mengoni & Sabina Nuti, 2014. "Applying discrete choice modelling in a priority setting: an investigation of public preferences for primary care models," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(7), pages 773-785, September.
    4. Mandy Ryan & Mabelle Amaya‐Amaya, 2005. "‘Threats’ to and hopes for estimating benefits," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(6), pages 609-619, June.
    5. Milena Pavlova & Wim Groot & Godefridus Merode, 2005. "An Application of Rating Conjoint Analysis to Study the Importance of Quality-, Access- and Price-attributes to Health Care Consumers," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 267-286, September.
    6. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294, April.
    7. Mandy Ryan, 1996. "Using Consumer Preferences in Health Care Decision Making: The Application of Conjoint Analysis," Monograph 000420, Office of Health Economics.
    8. Hammar, Henrik & Carlsson, Fredrik, 2001. "Smokers' Decisions To Quit Smoking," Working Papers in Economics 59, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    9. Zanakis, Stelios H. & Mandakovic, Tomislav & Gupta, Sushil K. & Sahay, Sundeep & Hong, Sungwan, 1995. "A review of program evaluation and fund allocation methods within the service and government sectors," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 59-79, March.
    10. Karin Monstad & Lars Birger Engesæter & Birgitte Espehaug, 2014. "Waiting Time And Socioeconomic Status—An Individual‐Level Analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4), pages 446-461, April.
    11. Margaret Gerteis & Rosemary Borck, "undated". "Shared Decision-Making in Practice: Lessons from Implementation Efforts," Mathematica Policy Research Reports f802e52b8442486594ecda927, Mathematica Policy Research.
    12. Olivier Thevenon & Philippe Batifoulier, 2003. "L'éthique (médicale) est elle soluble dans le calcul économique?," Post-Print hal-00442960, HAL.
    13. Fiebig, Denzil G. & Haas, Marion & Hossain, Ishrat & Street, Deborah J. & Viney, Rosalie, 2009. "Decisions about Pap tests: What influences women and providers?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 1766-1774, May.
    14. Stirling Bryan & David Parry, 2002. "Structural reliability of conjoint measurement in health care: an empirical investigation," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(5), pages 561-567.
    15. Domenico Lisi & Giacomo Pignataro, 2021. "A note on the trade‐off between waiting times and quality in a constrained hospital market," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 180-185, January.
    16. Silviya Nikolova; & Arthur Sinko; & Matt Sutton;, 2012. "Do maximum waiting times guarantees change clinical priorities? A Conditional Density Estimation approach," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 12/07, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    17. Godager, Geir, 2012. "Birds of a feather flock together: A study of doctor–patient matching," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 296-305.
    18. Udo Schneider & Jürgen Zerth, 2011. "Improving Prevention Compliance through Appropriate Incentives: Theoretical Modelling and Empirical Evidence," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 147(I), pages 71-106, March.
    19. Mandy Ryan & Angela Bate, 2001. "Testing the assumptions of rationality, continuity and symmetry when applying discrete choice experiments in health care," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 59-63.
    20. Soheil Davari & Kemal Kilic & Gurdal Ertek, 2015. "Fuzzy bi-objective preventive health care network design," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 303-317, September.

    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:wly:hlthec:v:7:y:1998:i:4:p:373-378. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.