Coast Joanna, Huynh Elisabeth, Kinghorn Philip, Flynn Terry
School of Social and Community Medicine , University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, 39 Whatley Road, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Institute for Choice, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2016 May;34(5):499-508. doi: 10.1007/s40273-015-0365-9.
The UK Medical Research Council approach to evaluating complex interventions moves through development, feasibility, piloting, evaluation and implementation in an iterative manner. This approach might be useful as a conceptual process underlying complex valuation tasks.
The objective of the study was to explore the applicability of such a framework using a single case study (valuing the ICECAP-Supportive Care Measure) and considering three key uncertainties: the number of response categories for the measure; experimental design; and the potential for using slightly different variants of the measure with the same value set.
Three on-line pilot studies (n = 204, n = 100, n = 102) were undertaken during 2012 and 2013 with adults from the UK general population. Each used variants of discrete choice and best-worst scaling tasks; respondents were randomly allocated to different groups to allow exploration of the number of levels for the instrument (four or five), optimal experimental design and the values for alternative wording around prognosis. Conditional logit regression models were used in the analysis and variance scale factors were explored.
The five-level version of the measure seemed to result in simplifying heuristics. Plotting the variance scale factors suggested that best-worst scaling answers were approximately four times more consistent than the discrete choice answers. The likelihood ratio test indicated there was virtually no difference in values between the differently worded versions.
Rigorous piloting can improve the design of valuation studies. Thinking in terms of a 'complex valuation framework' may emphasise the importance of conducting and funding such rigorous pilots.
英国医学研究理事会评估复杂干预措施的方法以迭代方式贯穿于开发、可行性、试点、评估和实施阶段。这种方法作为复杂估值任务的潜在概念性流程可能会很有用。
本研究的目的是通过单个案例研究(对ICECAP支持性护理措施进行估值)并考虑三个关键不确定性因素,探讨这样一个框架的适用性:该措施的反应类别数量;实验设计;以及使用具有相同价值集的该措施的略有不同变体的可能性。
2012年至2013年期间,对来自英国普通人群的成年人进行了三项在线试点研究(n = 204,n = 100,n = 102)。每项研究都使用了离散选择和最佳-最差缩放任务的变体;受访者被随机分配到不同组,以探讨该工具的水平数量(四个或五个)、最佳实验设计以及围绕预后的替代措辞的值。分析中使用了条件逻辑回归模型,并探讨了方差比例因子。
该措施的五级版本似乎导致了简化启发式方法。绘制方差比例因子表明,最佳-最差缩放答案的一致性大约是离散选择答案的四倍。似然比检验表明,措辞不同的版本之间的值几乎没有差异。
严格的试点可以改进估值研究的设计。从“复杂估值框架”的角度思考可能会强调进行和资助此类严格试点的重要性。