Advertisement
Value in Health
ISPOR
Advanced searchSave search
Preference-Based Assessments|Articles in Press

Download started.

Ok

Stakeholder engagement in designing attributes for a discrete choice experiment with policy implications: an example of two Swiss studies on healthcare delivery

Open AccessPublished:January 12, 2023DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2023.01.002
Stakeholder engagement in designing attributes for a discrete choice experiment with policy implications: an example of two Swiss studies on healthcare delivery
Previous ArticlePatient reported outcomes during and following HCV direct-acting antiviral treatment among people who inject drugs
Next ArticleThe Real-World Evidence Workstream In EUreccA 2025: How the task was addressed
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      Highlights:

      • -
        Attribute and attribute level development for DCE with policy relevance requires the systematic engagement of relevant stakeholders. However, there is little existing guidance and reporting standards for this process.
      • -
        This article proposes and empirically illustrates a framework tool for developing and reporting DCE attributes and attribute levels with multiple stakeholder engagement in two settings by two independent research teams. The proposed three-stage process consists of (1) collection, (2) selection, and (3) refinement of the DCE attributes and attribute levels.

      Abstract

      Objectives

      The use of discrete choice experiments (DCE) has become increasingly popular in health policy development by involving and analysing the preferences of target groups for different aspects of the policy intervention. In this paper, we aim to contribute to the standardization of the process of attribute and attribute level development for DCEs with policy relevance. To do so, we propose and empirically illustrate a framework tool for the development and reporting of attributes and attribute levels, with the systematic engagement of relevant stakeholders.

      Method

      The framework tool was kept general, to allow its use as a standard reporting approach on the development process of a DCE, involving relevant stakeholders at each stage. The proposed three-stage process consists of (1) collection, (2) selection, and (3) refinement of the DCE attributes and attribute levels. The application of the framework tool is illustrated by the two projects, Health2040 and COCONUTS – both concerning the preferences of the Swiss population for the future organization of healthcare.

      Results

      By engaging stakeholders, we identified and included attributes and attribute levels that would not have been identified solely through the existing literature. Additionally, including multiple stakeholders from different professional backgrounds ensured that the selected attributes and attribute levels were policy relevant, applicable in practice, and reflected the opinions of multiple actors in healthcare.

      Conclusion

      The proposed framework helps to strengthen the standardisation of the reporting on attribute and attribute level development with stakeholder engagement, and to guide future research teams designing a DCE with policy implications.

      Keywords

      Article info

      Publication history

      Accepted: January 5, 2023
      Received in revised form: December 13, 2022
      Received: August 9, 2022

      Publication stage

      In Press Accepted Manuscript

      Footnotes

      Precis: Proposal and empirical illustration of a framework tool for developing and reporting attributes and attribute levels with systematic stakeholder engagement for DCE with policy implications

      Author Contributions:

      Concept and design: Föhn, Nicolet, Marti, Kaufmann, Balthasar

      Acquisition of data: Föhn, Kaufmann, Balthasar

      Analysis and interpretation of data: Föhn, Nicolet, Marti, Kaufmann, Balthasar

      Drafting of the manuscript: Föhn, Nicolet, Marti, Kaufmann, Balthasar

      Critical revision of the paper for important intellectual content: Föhn, Nicolet, Marti, Kaufmann, Balthasar

      Statistical analysis: Föhn, Nicolet

      Obtaining funding: Marti, Kaufmann, Balthasar

      Supervision: Marti, Kaufmann, Balthasar

      Conflict of Interest Disclosures:

      The authors reported no conflicts of interest.

      Funding/Support:

      Health2040: This study was funded by the University of Lucerne and the Federal Office of Public Health Switzerland.

      COCONUTS: This study was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) within Smarter health care - National Research Programme (NRP 74) and grant number (407440_183447).

      Role of Funder/Sponsor: The funding agreement ensured the authors’ independence in designing the study, interpreting the data, writing, and publishing the report.

      Acknowledgment: No Acknowledgment

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2023.01.002

      Copyright

      © 2023 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc.

      User license

      Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) |
      How you can reuse Information Icon
      Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0)

      Permitted

      • Read, print & download
      • Redistribute or republish the final article
      • Text & data mine
      • Translate the article
      • Reuse portions or extracts from the article in other works
      • Sell or re-use for commercial purposes

      Elsevier's open access license policy

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect
      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the for this site.
      Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties. The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      RELX