Using stated preference discrete choice modelling to evaluate the introduction of varicella vaccination
Applications of stated preference discrete choice modelling (SPDCM) in health economics have been used to estimate consumer willingness to pay and to broaden the range of consequences considered in economic evaluation. This paper demonstrates how SPDCM can be used to predict participation rates, using the case of varicella (chickenpox) vaccination. Varicella vaccination may be cost effective compared to other public health programs, but this conclusion is sensitive to the proportion of the target population immunised. A choice experiment was conducted on a sample of Australian parents to predict uptake across a range of hypothetical programs. Immunisation rates would be increased by providing immunisation at no cost, by requiring it for school entry, by increasing immunisation rates in the community and decreasing the incidence of mild and severe side effects. There were two significant interactions; price modified the effect of both support from authorities and severe side effects. Country of birth was the only significant demographic characteristic. Depending on aspects of the immunisation program, the immunisation rates of children with Australian-born parents varied from 9% to 99% while for the children with parents born outside Australia they varied from 40% to 99%. This demonstrates how SPDCM can be used to understand the levels of attributes that will induce a change in the decision to immunise, the modification of the effect of one attribute by another, and subgroups in the population. Such insights can contribute to the optimal design and targeting of health programs. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Volume (Year): 11 (2002)
Issue (Month): 5 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Stirling Bryan & Martin Buxton & Robert Sheldon & Alison Grant, 1998. "Magnetic resonance imaging for the investigation of knee injuries: an investigation of preferences," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(7), pages 595-603.
- 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.
- Patricia Kenny & Jane Hall & Rosalie Viney & Angela Yeoh & Marion Haas, 2002. "Using qualitative methods to validate a stated preference survey for evaluating health services, CHERE Discussion Paper No 47," Discussion Papers 47, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
- Scuffham, P. & Devlin, N. & Eberhart-Phillips, J. & Wilson-Salt, R., 1999. "The cost-effectiveness of introducing a varicella vaccine to the New Zealand immunisation schedule," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 763-779, September.
- Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
- Streefland, Pieter & Chowdhury, A. M. R. & Ramos-Jimenez, Pilar, 1999. "Patterns of vaccination acceptance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(12), pages 1705-1716, December.
- 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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:11:y:2002:i:5:p:457-465. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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.