On-line structured prioritisation exercise (SPE). Full survey used to collect data. (DOCX 42Â kb

A De Brún

A Eissa

Aoife De Brún

C Pope

C Vass

Christopher I. Price

D Flynn

Darren Flynn

DM Kent

E Lancsar

EC Jauch

Emily Lancsar

F Reed Johnson

G Abiiro

Gary A. Ford

GB Willis

Helen Rodgers

I de Ridder

J Coast

J Kwan

J Van Swieten

JF Bridges

JM Wardlaw

John Teah

K Laver

Laura Ternent

M Dirks

M Hiligsmann

M Ryan

Matthew Rudd

MC Shamy

MJ Murtagh

MJ Reeves

P Edwards

P Sandercock

Richard G. Thomson

Stephen Simpson

W Hacke

WJ Meurer

BMC Health Services Research

English

Aoife De BrĂşn (5437502)

Darren Flynn (614507)

Laura Ternent (2814304)

Christopher Price (614508)

Helen Rodgers (130894)

Gary Ford (3580913)

Matthew Rudd (5437496)

Emily Lancsar (2816641)

Stephen Simpson (3275010)

John Teah (5437499)

Richard Thomson (374191)

FigShare

Additional file 1: of A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

Background: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) is a method used to elicit participants' preferences and the relative importance of different attributes and levels within a decision-making process. DCEs have become popular in healthcare; however, approaches to identify the attributes/levels influencing a decision of interest and to selection methods for their inclusion in a DCE are under-reported. Our objectives were: to explore the development process used to select/present attributes/levels from the identified range that may be influential; to describe a systematic and rigorous development process for design of a DCE in the context of thrombolytic therapy for acute stroke; and, to discuss the advantages of our five-stage approach to enhance current guidance for developing DCEs. Methods: A five-stage DCE development process was undertaken. Methods employed included literature review, qualitative analysis of interview and ethnographic data, expert panel discussions, a quantitative structured prioritisation (ranking) exercise and pilot testing of the DCE using a 'think aloud' approach. Results: The five-stage process reported helped to reduce the list of 22 initial patient-related factors to a final set of nine variable factors and six fixed factors for inclusion in a testable DCE using a vignette model of presentation. Conclusions: In order for the data and conclusions generated by DCEs to be deemed valid, it is crucial that the methods of design and development are documented and reported. This paper has detailed a rigorous and systematic approach to DCE development which may be useful to researchers seeking to establish methods for reducing and prioritising attributes for inclusion in future DCEs.</p

De Brún, Aoife

Flynn, Darren

Ternent, Laura

Price, Christopher I.

Rodgers, Helen

Ford, Gary A.

Rudd, Matthew

Lancsar, Emily

Simpson, Stephen

Teah, John

Thomson, Richard G.

Teeside University's Research Repository

A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments:Case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

Abstract Background A discrete choice experiment (DCE) is a method used to elicit participants’ preferences and the relative importance of different attributes and levels within a decision-making process. DCEs have become popular in healthcare; however, approaches to identify the attributes/levels influencing a decision of interest and to selection methods for their inclusion in a DCE are under-reported. Our objectives were: to explore the development process used to select/present attributes/levels from the identified range that may be influential; to describe a systematic and rigorous development process for design of a DCE in the context of thrombolytic therapy for acute stroke; and, to discuss the advantages of our five-stage approach to enhance current guidance for developing DCEs. Methods A five-stage DCE development process was undertaken. Methods employed included literature review, qualitative analysis of interview and ethnographic data, expert panel discussions, a quantitative structured prioritisation (ranking) exercise and pilot testing of the DCE using a ‘think aloud’ approach. Results The five-stage process reported helped to reduce the list of 22 initial patient-related factors to a final set of nine variable factors and six fixed factors for inclusion in a testable DCE using a vignette model of presentation. Conclusions In order for the data and conclusions generated by DCEs to be deemed valid, it is crucial that the methods of design and development are documented and reported. This paper has detailed a rigorous and systematic approach to DCE development which may be useful to researchers seeking to establish methods for reducing and prioritising attributes for inclusion in future DCEs

Directory of Open Access Journals

A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

Teesside University Research

DCE pilot testing protocol. Interview schedule for cognitive interviewing and pilot testing of DCE. (DOCX 18Â kb

Additional file 2: of A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

Operational definitions for variable attribute levels in the DCE. Table presenting definitions used for attribute levels in the DCE. (DOCX 13Â kb

Additional file 4: of A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments: case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

Crossref

Background: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) is a method used to elicit participants' preferences and the relative importance of different attributes and levels within a decision-making process. DCEs have become popular in healthcare; however, approaches to identify the attributes/levels influencing a decision of interest and to selection methods for their inclusion in a DCE are under-reported. Our objectives were: to explore the development process used to select/present attributes/levels from the identified range that may be influential; to describe a systematic and rigorous development process for design of a DCE in the context of thrombolytic therapy for acute stroke; and, to discuss the advantages of our five-stage approach to enhance current guidance for developing DCEs. Methods: A five-stage DCE development process was undertaken. Methods employed included literature review, qualitative analysis of interview and ethnographic data, expert panel discussions, a quantitative structured prioritisation (ranking) exercise and pilot testing of the DCE using a 'think aloud' approach. Results: The five-stage process reported helped to reduce the list of 22 initial patient-related factors to a final set of nine variable factors and six fixed factors for inclusion in a testable DCE using a vignette model of presentation. Conclusions: In order for the data and conclusions generated by DCEs to be deemed valid, it is crucial that the methods of design and development are documented and reported. This paper has detailed a rigorous and systematic approach to DCE development which may be useful to researchers seeking to establish methods for reducing and prioritising attributes for inclusion in future DCEs

Northumbria Research Link

https://figshare.com/articles/Additional_file_2_of_A_novel_design_process_for_selection_of_attributes_for_inclusion_in_discrete_choice_experiments_case_study_exploring_variation_in_clinical_decision-making_about_thrombolysis_in_the_treatment_of_acute_ischaemic_stroke/6651692

A novel design process for selection of attributes for inclusion in discrete choice experiments:Case study exploring variation in clinical decision-making about thrombolysis in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

FigShare

Teeside University's Research Repository

Teeside University's Research Repository

Directory of Open Access Journals

Teesside University Research

FigShare

FigShare

Crossref

Northumbria Research Link