Author
Listed:
- Sven Petrus Henricus Nouwens
(Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University)
- Stella Maria Marceta
(Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University)
- Michael Bui
(University of Twente)
- Daisy Maria Alberta Hendrika Dijk
(Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University)
- Catharina Gerarda Maria Groothuis-Oudshoorn
(University of Twente)
- Jorien Veldwijk
(Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University)
- Janine Astrid Til
(University of Twente)
- Esther Wilhelmina Bekker-Grob
(Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus University Rotterdam
Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam, Erasmus University)
Abstract
Introduction Stakeholder preference evaluations are increasingly emphasized in healthcare policy and health technology assessment. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are the most common method for quantifying preferences among patients, the public, and healthcare professionals. While prior reviews (1990–2017) have examined DCE trends, no comprehensive synthesis exists for studies published since 2018. This updated review (2018–2023) provides critical insights into evolving methodologies and global trends in health-related DCEs. Methods A systematic search (2018–2023) of Medline, Embase, and Web of Science identified relevant studies. Studies were screened for inclusion and data were extracted, including details on DCE design and analysis. To enable trend comparisons, the search strategy and extraction items aligned with previous reviews. Results Of 2663 identified papers, 1279 met the inclusion criteria, reflecting a significant rise in published DCEs over time. DCEs were conducted globally, with a remarkable increase in publications from Asia and Africa compared with previous reviews. Experimental designs and econometric models have advanced, continuing prior trends. Notably, most recent DCEs were administered online. Discussion The rapid growth of DCE applications underscores their importance in health research. While the methodology is advancing rapidly, it is crucial that researchers provide full transparency in reporting their methods, particularly in detailing experimental designs and validity tests, which are too often overlooked. Key recommendations include improving reporting of experimental designs, applying validity tests, following good practices for presenting benefit–risk attributes, and adopting open science practices. Ensuring methodological rigor will maximize the impact and reproducibility of DCE research in health economics.
Suggested Citation
Sven Petrus Henricus Nouwens & Stella Maria Marceta & Michael Bui & Daisy Maria Alberta Hendrika Dijk & Catharina Gerarda Maria Groothuis-Oudshoorn & Jorien Veldwijk & Janine Astrid Til & Esther Wilhe, 2025.
"The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review,"
PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 43(8), pages 879-936, August.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:pharme:v:43:y:2025:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-025-01495-y
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-025-01495-y
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:43:y:2025:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-025-01495-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.