Managing Minor Ailments : The Public’s Preferences for Attributes of Community Pharmacies. A Discrete Choice Experiment

Acknowledgements We thank members of the wider study steering group (Dr Karen Gerard, Dr Ben Craig and Mr Ron Marsh) for their input to the study design, and all respondents who completed the survey. Funding: This work was funded by Medical Research Council MR/J004812/1 to VW (www.mrc.ac.uk), and Pharmacy Research UK 1076457 to MW (www.pharmacyresearchuk.org/). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Decision heuristic or preference? Attribute non-attendance in discrete choice problems

Funded by National Clinical Assessment Service (NCAS) and Institute of Applied Health SciencePeer reviewedPostprin

Mode and Frame Matter : assessing the impact of survey mode and sample frame in choice experiments

This work was funded by the Medical Research Council MR/J004812/1. The Health Economics Research Unit is funded by the Chief Scientists Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Testing the Expert Based Weights Used in the UK’s Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Against Three Preference-Based Methods

The paper has benefitted from helpful comments and suggestions from Koen Decancq, Rainer Schulz, and participants at the Weighting in Multidimensional Measures workshop at OPHI, Oxford, the Overseas Development Workshop at ODI, London, seminar participants at Universiteit Antwerpen, and conference participants at New Directions in Welfare III, Paris. Any errors or omissions, of course, remain the responsibility of the authors. The project was funded by the Department of the Communities and Local Government. The Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates funds HERU. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors only and not those of the funding bodies.Peer reviewedPostprin

The Best of Both Worlds : An Example Mixed Methods Approach to Understand Men’s Preferences for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms

Funded by Astellas Pharma Europe and Chief Scientist Office DI, SH, VW and MR are employed by the University of Aberdeen and performed the research. CM and JN are employees of Astellas Pharma EMEA, which funded the study in an unrestricted contract. All authors were involved in writing or reviewing the manuscript. Ethical approval was obtained from the College Ethics Research Board of the College of Life Science and Medicine, University of Aberdeen (CERB/2013/8/942). The Health Economics Research Unit (HERU) is supported by the Chief Scientist Office (CSO) at the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate.Peer reviewedPostprin

Is best-worst scaling suitable for health state valuation? : A comparison with discrete choice experiments

The University of Aberdeen (UoA) and the Chief Scientist Office (CSO) of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates fund the Health Economics Research Unit (HERU). We thank all participants who took part in the study and the WH Ross foundation that supported the data collection. We also thank authors of the original study (Mary Kilonzo, Jennifer Burr and Luke Vale) for their contribution to questionnaire design and data collection. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors only and not those of the funding bodies.Peer reviewedPostprin

Men’s preferences for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms associated with benign prostatic hyperplasia : a discrete choice experiment

HERU is supported by the Chief Scientist Office (CSO) at the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorate. Sebastian Heidenreich acknowledges financial support from the Institute of Applied Health Science, University of Aberdeen. Medical writing support was provided by Tyrone Daniel from Bioscript Medical, and was funded by Astellas Pharma Europe Ltd. Presented in part as a poster at the ISPOR 17th Annual European Congress, November 8–12, 2014, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. The poster’s abstract was published in Value in Health. 2014;17 (7):A472. Open Access JournalPeer reviewedPublisher PD

Short report: Evaluation of wider community support for a neurodiversity teaching programme designed using participatory methods

Children with diagnoses such as autism, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dyslexia and so on often experience bullying at school. This group can be described as neurodivergent, meaning they think and process information differently from most people. Previous research suggests that increasing people's knowledge can be an effective way to reduce stigma and bullying. Therefore, we decided to create a primary school resource to teach about neurodiversity - the concept that all humans vary in how our brains work. Working with educators, our research team - which included neurodivergent people - developed plans for a teaching programme called Learning About Neurodiversity at School (LEANS). Next, we wanted to know whether these plans, developed by our small neurodiverse team, would be endorsed by the wider community. To find out, we conducted an online feedback survey about our plans for the resource. We analysed feedback from 111 people who participated. Most of them identified as neurodivergent (70%) and reported being familiar with neurodiversity (98%), meaning they could provide an informed opinion on our plans. Over 90% of people expressed support for the planned programme content described in the survey, and 73% of them approved our intended definition of the resource's core concept, neurodiversity. From these results, we concluded that there was a high level of support for the planned LEANS programme content across those from the wider community who completed the survey. Consequently, we continued developing the LEANS programme in line with the initial plans from our neurodiverse team. The completed resource is now available as a free download