Designing choice experiments with many attributes. An application to setting priorities for orthopaedic waiting lists
AbstractThe aim of this paper is to undertake a discrete choice experiment using a 'blocked attribute' design. To date in the health economics literature, most discrete choice experiments have used only a relatively small number of attributes due to concerns about task complexity, non-compensatory decision rules, simplicity of experimental designs, and the costs of surveys. This may lead to omitted variable bias and reduced explanatory power when attributes have been pre-selected from a longer list. There may be situations where it is desirable to include a longer list of attributes, such as attaching weights to quality-of-life instruments to obtain single index scores. We examine this issue in the context of attaching weights to a disease-specific quality-of-life instrument used to prioritise patients on orthopaedic waiting lists in Victorian hospitals. Eleven attributes are allocated across three separate experimental designs and the data pooled for analysis. Pooling is justified given the specific context of the study, including attempts to minimise the effect of unobserved heterogeneity across the three models when designing the study and collecting data. Blocked attribute designs may offer flexibility to researchers when it is not possible or desirable to reduce the number of attributes. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.
Volume (Year): 18 (2009)
Issue (Month): 6 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749
Other versions of this item:
- Julia Witt & Anthony Scott & Richard H. Osborne, 2006. "Designing Choice Experiments with Many Attributes: An Application to Setting Priorities for Orthopaedic Waiting Lists," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2006n24, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009.
"Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, October.
- Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S & Train, Kenneth, 1999.
"Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles,"
University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers
qt45f996hh, University of California Transportation Center.
- Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S. & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 315-338, June.
- McKenzie, Lynda & Cairns, John & Osman, Liesl, 2001. "Symptom-based outcome measures for asthma: the use of discrete choice methods to assess patient preferences," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 193-204, September.
- Joel Huber & Kenneth Train, 2001.
"On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths,"
- Huber, Joel & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt7zm4f51b, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Joel Huber and Kenneth Train., 2000. "On the Similarity of Classical and Bayesian Estimates of Individual Mean Partworths," Economics Working Papers E00-289, University of California at Berkeley.
- Hensher, David & Louviere, Jordan & Swait, Joffre, 1998. "Combining sources of preference data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 197-221, November.
- Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, October.
- Ryan, Mandy & Netten, Ann & Skatun, Diane & Smith, Paul, 2006. "Using discrete choice experiments to estimate a preference-based measure of outcome--An application to social care for older people," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 927-944, September.
- Scott, Anthony, 2002. "Identifying and analysing dominant preferences in discrete choice experiments: An application in health care," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 383-398, June.
- 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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.