Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation
There has been an assumption in the health economics literature that health outcomes are all that need to be considered when attempting to measure the benefits from health care interventions. This is most evident in the development of the quality adjusted life year (QALY) approach to benefit assessment. This paper challenges this view and considers the technique of conjoint analysis (CA) as a methodology for both taking account of patient preferences and considering attributes beyond health outcomes. The technique is applied to in vitro fertilisation. CA is shown to be sensitive to considering health outcomes, nonhealth outcomes and process attributes. It is also shown to be internally consistent and internally valid. The paper demonstrates the application of CA to estimating willingness to pay indirectly. It is argued that benefit assessment within health economics should extend beyond health outcomes and future research should investigate more thoroughly the potential application of CA in this area. However, methodological issues need addressing before the instrument becomes an established evaluative instrument.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 48 (1999)
Issue (Month): 4 (February)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:48:y:1999:i:4:p:535-546. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.