An Application of Rating Conjoint Analysis to Study the Importance of Quality-, Access- and Price-attributes to Health Care Consumers
Outside the health care sector, consumer preferences have been effectively studied using rating and ranking conjoint techniques. In the health care sector this technique has received less attention than its choice-based variant. Applications of rating and ranking method to health care issues are few. This paper presents an application of rating conjoint analysis to study the importance of quality, access and price to the health care consumers in Bulgaria. The paper first describes the rating conjoint method and its distinctive features compared to the choice-based and the ranking approach. The method is illustrated by the rating conjoint design applied in the study. Next, the impact of different quality-, access- and price-levels on the rating of physician profiles is analysed and the differences between the socio-demographic groups are examined. The results suggest that similar to other countries, the quality of care is a highly valued characteristic in Bulgaria, whereas access is perceived as less important. The considerable importance of patient payments further implies that Bulgarians are responsive to prices in the health care sector, especially the elderly, the village dwellers and the lowest income groups. The relevance of the results with regards to health policy and planning, as well as with regards to the methodology of rating conjoint analysis is discussed at the end of the paper. Copyright Springer 2005
Volume (Year): 37 (2005)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/economics/development/journal/10644/PS2|
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.:
- Stevens, Thomas H. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Willis, Cleve E., 1997. "Conjoint Analysis Of Groundwater Protection Programs," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(2), October.
- Mandy Ryan & Emma McIntosh & Phil Shackley, 1998. "Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(4), pages 373-378.
- Earnhart, Dietrich, 2002. "Combining Revealed and Stated Data to Examine Housing Decisions Using Discrete Choice Analysis," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 143-169, January.
- Roe, Brian & Boyle, Kevin J. & Teisl, Mario F., 1996. "Using Conjoint Analysis to Derive Estimates of Compensating Variation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 145-159, September.
- Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. " Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
- Baidu-Forson, Jojo & Ntare, Bonny R. & Waliyar, Farid, 1997. "Utilizing conjoint analysis to design modern crop varieties: Empirical example for groundnut in Niger," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 219-226, August.
- Milena Pavlova & Wim Groot & Godefridus Van Merode, 2004. "Willingness and ability of Bulgarian consumers to pay for improved public health care services," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(10), pages 1117-1130.
- Baidu-Forson, Jojo & Ntare, Bonny R. & Waliyar, Farid, 1997. "Utilizing conjoint analysis to design modern crop varieties: empirical example for groundnut in Niger," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(3), August.
- Maydeu-Olivares, Albert, 2002. "Limited information estimation and testing of Thurstonian models for preference data," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 467-483, July.
- Green, Paul E, 1974. " On the Design of Choice Experiments Involving Multifactor Alternatives," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 61-68, Se.
- Mandy Ryan & Jenny Hughes, 1997. "Using Conjoint Analysis to Assess Women's Preferences for Miscarriage Management," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 261-273.
- Shelley Farrar & Mandy Ryan, 1999. "Response-ordering effects: a methodological issue in conjoint analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 75-79.
- Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
- Vick, Sandra & Scott, Anthony, 1998. "Agency in health care. Examining patients' preferences for attributes of the doctor-patient relationship," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 587-605, October.
- Ulla Slothuus Skjoldborg & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, 2003. "Conjoint analysis. The cost variable: an Achilles' heel?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(6), pages 479-491.
- Harry Telser & Peter Zweifel, 2002. "Measuring willingness-to-pay for risk reduction: an application of conjoint analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(2), pages 129-139.
- Stevens, Thomas H. & Barrett, Christopher & Willis, Cleve E., 1997. "Conjoint Analysis of Groundwater Protection Programs," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(02), pages 229-236, October.
- Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
- Stirling Bryan & Lisa Gold & Rob Sheldon & Martin Buxton, 2000. "Preference measurement using conjoint methods: an empirical investigation of reliability," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(5), pages 385-395.
- Ryan, Mandy, 1999. "Using conjoint analysis to take account of patient preferences and go beyond health outcomes: an application to in vitro fertilisation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 535-546, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:ecopln:v:37:y:2005:i:3:p:267-286. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.