Jakubczyk Michał, Craig Benjamin M, Barra Mathias, Groothuis-Oudshoorn Catharina G M, Hartman John D, Huynh Elisabeth, Ramos-Goñi Juan M, Stolk Elly A, Rand Kim
Decision Analysis and Support Unit, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland.
Department of Economics, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Value Health. 2018 Feb;21(2):229-238. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.09.016. Epub 2017 Nov 8.
To identify which specifications and approaches to model selection better predict health preferences, the International Academy of Health Preference Research (IAHPR) hosted a predictive modeling competition including 18 teams from around the world.
In April 2016, an exploratory survey was fielded: 4074 US respondents completed 20 out of 1560 paired comparisons by choosing between two health descriptions (e.g., longer life span vs. better health). The exploratory data were distributed to all teams. By July, eight teams had submitted their predictions for 1600 additional pairs and described their analytical approach. After these predictions had been posted online, a confirmatory survey was fielded (4148 additional respondents).
The victorious team, "Discreetly Charming Econometricians," led by Michał Jakubczyk, achieved the smallest χ, 4391.54 (a predefined criterion). Its primary scientific findings were that different models performed better with different pairs, that the value of life span is not constant proportional, and that logit models have poor predictive validity in health valuation.
The results demonstrated the diversity and potential of new analytical approaches in health preference research and highlighted the importance of predictive validity in health valuation.
为了确定哪种模型选择的规范和方法能更好地预测健康偏好，国际健康偏好研究学会（IAHPR）举办了一场预测建模竞赛，来自世界各地的18支队伍参赛。
2016年4月进行了一项探索性调查：4074名美国受访者通过在两种健康描述（例如，更长的寿命与更好的健康状况）之间进行选择，完成了1560对比较中的20对。探索性数据分发给了所有参赛队伍。到7月时，八支队伍提交了对另外1600对比较的预测，并描述了他们的分析方法。在这些预测发布到网上后，又进行了一项验证性调查（另外4148名受访者）。
由米哈尔·雅库布奇克带领的获胜队伍“低调迷人的计量经济学家队”，χ值最小，为4391.54（一个预定义标准）。其主要科学发现是，不同的模型在不同的比较对上表现更好，寿命的价值并非恒定成比例，并且logit模型在健康估值中的预测效度较差。
结果证明了健康偏好研究中新分析方法的多样性和潜力，并突出了预测效度在健康估值中的重要性。
