Norman Richard, Kemmler Georg, Viney Rosalie, Pickard A Simon, Gamper Eva, Holzner Bernhard, Nerich Virginie, King Madeleine
School of Public Health, Curtin University, Bentley, Western Australia, Australia.
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Value Health. 2016 Dec;19(8):1033-1038. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.07.003. Epub 2016 Sep 21.
Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are increasingly used to value aspects of health. An issue with their adoption is that results may be sensitive to the order in which dimensions of health are presented in the valuation task. Findings in the literature regarding order effects are discordant at present.
To quantify the magnitude of order effect of quality-of-life (QOL) dimensions within the context of a DCE designed to produce country-specific value sets for the EORTC Quality of Life Utility Measure-Core 10 dimensions (QLU-C10D), a new utility instrument derived from the widely used cancer-specific QOL questionnaire, the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30.
The DCE comprised 960 choice sets, divided into 60 versions of 16 choice sets, with each respondent assigned to a version. Within each version, the order of QLU-C10D QOL dimensions was randomized, followed by life duration in the last position. The DCE was completed online by 2053 individuals in France and Germany. We analyzed the data with a series of conditional logit models, adjusted for repeated choices within respondent. We used F tests to assess order effects, correcting for multiple hypothesis testing.
Each F test failed to reject the null hypothesis of no position effect: 1) all QOL order positions considered jointly; 2) last QOL position only; 3) first QOL position only. Furthermore, the order coefficients were small relative to those of the QLU-C10D QOL dimension levels.
The order of presentation of QOL dimensions within a DCE designed to provide utility weights for the QLU-C10D had little effect on level coefficients of those QOL dimensions.
离散选择实验(DCEs)越来越多地用于评估健康的各个方面。采用该方法存在的一个问题是,结果可能对评估任务中健康维度的呈现顺序敏感。目前,文献中关于顺序效应的研究结果并不一致。
在一项旨在为欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量效用测量核心10维度(QLU-C10D)生成特定国家价值集的DCE背景下,量化生活质量(QOL)维度的顺序效应大小。QLU-C10D是一种新的效用工具,源自广泛使用的癌症特异性QOL问卷——欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量问卷核心30。
DCE包括960个选择集,分为60个版本,每个版本16个选择集,每个受访者被分配到一个版本。在每个版本中,QLU-C10D QOL维度的顺序是随机的,最后一个位置是寿命时长。2053名法国和德国的个体通过在线方式完成了DCE。我们使用一系列条件logit模型对数据进行分析,并对受访者内的重复选择进行了调整。我们使用F检验评估顺序效应,并对多重假设检验进行校正。
每次F检验均未能拒绝无位置效应的原假设:1)综合考虑所有QOL顺序位置;2)仅考虑最后一个QOL位置;3)仅考虑第一个QOL位置。此外,与QLU-C10D QOL维度水平的系数相比,顺序系数较小。
在一项旨在为QLU-C10D提供效用权重的DCE中,QOL维度的呈现顺序对这些QOL维度的水平系数影响很小。