Duke University, 200 Morris St, Durham, NC, 27701, USA.
Patient. 2019 Jun;12(3):287-295. doi: 10.1007/s40271-019-00360-3.
Stated-preference (SP) methods, such as discrete-choice experiments (DCE) and best-worst scaling (BWS), have increasingly been used to measure preferences for attributes of medical interventions. Preference information is commonly characterized using attribute importance. However, attribute importance measures can vary in value and interpretation depending on the method used to elicit preferences, the specific context of the questions, and the approach used to normalize attribute effects. This variation complicates the interpretation of preference results and the comparability of results across subgroups in a sample. This article highlights the potential consequences of ignoring variations in attribute importance measures, and makes the case for reporting more clearly how these measures are obtained and calculated. Transparency in the calculations can clarify what conclusions are supported by the results, and help make more accurate and meaningful comparisons across subsamples.
偏好调查(SP)方法,如离散选择实验(DCE)和最佳最差标度法(BWS),已越来越多地用于衡量对医疗干预措施属性的偏好。偏好信息通常使用属性重要性来描述。然而,由于偏好的启发方法、问题的具体背景以及用于规范化属性效果的方法不同,属性重要性的度量值在数值和解释上可能会有所不同。这种变化使得偏好结果的解释以及样本中不同亚组之间的结果可比性变得复杂。本文强调了忽略属性重要性度量变化可能带来的后果,并提出了更清楚地报告如何获得和计算这些度量的必要性。计算过程的透明度可以阐明结果支持哪些结论,并有助于在子样本之间进行更准确和有意义的比较。