• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

运用离散选择模型来确定医疗保健资源分配的优先顺序偏好。

Using discrete choice model to elicit preference for health-care priority setting.

作者信息

Jouyani Yaser, Hadiyan Mohammad, Salehi Masoud, Souri Ali

机构信息

Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Health Management and Economics Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

出版信息

J Educ Health Promot. 2019 Jun 27;8:117. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_404_18. eCollection 2019.

DOI:10.4103/jehp.jehp_404_18
PMID:31334269
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6615128/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Regarding lack of resources in the health-care sector, prioritization of these resources is inevitable. The objective of the current study was to elicit public preference in prioritizing and allocating health resources using a discrete choice experiment technique, which is currently the most commonly applied method in this field of researches.

METHODS

In this discrete choice study, five attributes were selected through interview with 25 health experts to elicit people preferences in Tehran (Iran) in 2017. Eighteen choice tasks were arranged within 3 blocks, and this would be achieved with a sample size of 579. Choice data were modeled using generalized estimating equation method and STATA 14 software.

RESULTS

Five attributes including level of emergency, severity of disease, communicable, benefit from treatment, and age are the most important attributes in the prioritizing health resources from the expert's point of view. As well as among these attributes, communicable (odds ratio = 2.81) is the most important attributes from the public's point of view.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study could be very useful for prioritizing resources which is one of the most challenging measurements of the health system. By identifying the importance of each patient's characteristic, patients can be categorized in groups with different priorities, as well as the diagnosis-related group system, based on which resources are allocated.

摘要

背景

鉴于医疗保健部门资源匮乏,对这些资源进行优先排序是不可避免的。本研究的目的是使用离散选择实验技术得出公众在卫生资源优先排序和分配方面的偏好,这是目前该研究领域最常用的方法。

方法

在这项离散选择研究中,通过与25位健康专家进行访谈,选取了五个属性,以了解2017年德黑兰(伊朗)民众的偏好。在3个模块中安排了18个选择任务,样本量为579。使用广义估计方程法和STATA 14软件对选择数据进行建模。

结果

从专家的角度来看,包括紧急程度、疾病严重程度、传染性、治疗获益和年龄在内的五个属性是卫生资源优先排序中最重要的属性。在这些属性中,从公众的角度来看,传染性(优势比=2.81)是最重要的属性。

结论

本研究结果对于资源优先排序可能非常有用,而资源优先排序是卫生系统最具挑战性的措施之一。通过确定每个患者特征的重要性,可以将患者分为具有不同优先级的组,以及基于诊断相关分组系统来分配资源。

相似文献

1
Using discrete choice model to elicit preference for health-care priority setting.运用离散选择模型来确定医疗保健资源分配的优先顺序偏好。
J Educ Health Promot. 2019 Jun 27;8:117. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_404_18. eCollection 2019.
2
Public Preferences and Willingness to Pay for a COVID-19 Vaccine in Iran: A Discrete Choice Experiment.伊朗民众对新冠疫苗的偏好及支付意愿:一项离散选择实验
Pharmacoecon Open. 2022 Sep;6(5):669-679. doi: 10.1007/s41669-022-00359-x. Epub 2022 Aug 23.
3
Eliciting the public preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy in Iran: a discrete choice experiment study.探究伊朗民众对药品补贴的偏好:一项离散选择实验研究。
J Pharm Policy Pract. 2021 Jul 13;14(1):59. doi: 10.1186/s40545-021-00345-4.
4
Public preferences for prioritizing preventive and curative health care interventions: a discrete choice experiment.公众对预防性和治疗性医疗保健干预措施进行优先排序的偏好:一项离散选择实验。
Value Health. 2015 Mar;18(2):224-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2014.12.007.
5
Patients' preferences for attributes related to health care services at hospitals in Amhara Region, northern Ethiopia: a discrete choice experiment.埃塞俄比亚北部阿姆哈拉地区医院患者对医疗服务相关属性的偏好:一项离散选择实验
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015 Sep 10;9:1293-301. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S87928. eCollection 2015.
6
Involving the public in priority setting: a case study using discrete choice experiments.让公众参与优先事项设定:使用离散选择实验的案例研究。
J Public Health (Oxf). 2012 Jun;34(2):253-60. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdr102. Epub 2011 Dec 15.
7
Developing attributes and levels for a discrete choice experiment on basic health insurance in Iran.为伊朗基本医疗保险的离散选择实验确定属性和水平。
Med J Islam Repub Iran. 2018 Mar 28;32:26. doi: 10.14196/mjiri.32.26. eCollection 2018.
8
Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques.获取公众对医疗保健的偏好:技术的系统评价
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(5):1-186. doi: 10.3310/hta5050.
9
Identification and Prioritization of Attributes for a Discrete Choice Experiment Using the Nominal Group Technique: Patients' Choice of Public Health Facilities in Cape Town, South Africa.运用名义群体技术识别和确定离散选择实验的属性:南非开普敦的患者对公立卫生机构的选择。
Value Health Reg Issues. 2022 Jan-Feb;27:90-98. doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2021.06.005. Epub 2021 Dec 8.
10
The Public's Preferences for Psychological Interventions During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Discrete Choice Experiment.新冠疫情期间公众对心理干预措施的偏好:一项离散选择实验
Front Psychiatry. 2022 Apr 27;13:805512. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.805512. eCollection 2022.

引用本文的文献

1
The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.健康经济学中离散选择实验的发展态势:一项系统综述
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 May 21. doi: 10.1007/s40273-025-01495-y.
2
Exploration of preferences among people with COPD to inform resource allocation: a discrete choice experiment study.探索 COPD 患者的偏好,以提供资源分配信息:一项离散选择实验研究。
BMJ Open Respir Res. 2024 Oct 9;11(1):e001914. doi: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-001914.
3
Systematic Review of the Relative Social Value of Child and Adult Health.儿童和成人健康的相对社会价值的系统评价
Pharmacoeconomics. 2024 Feb;42(2):177-198. doi: 10.1007/s40273-023-01327-x. Epub 2023 Nov 9.
4
Development of attributes and levels of mental health insurance services using a discrete choice experiment.运用离散选择实验法开展心理健康保险服务的属性及水平研究
J Educ Health Promot. 2023 Apr 28;12:134. doi: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_433_22. eCollection 2023.
5
Healthcare priority-setting criteria and social values in Iran: an investigation of local evidence.伊朗的医疗保健重点制定标准和社会价值观:对当地证据的调查。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2023 Jun 19;39(1):e37. doi: 10.1017/S0266462323000302.

本文引用的文献

1
An Exploratory Application of Eye-Tracking Methods in a Discrete Choice Experiment.眼动追踪方法在离散选择实验中的探索性应用。
Med Decis Making. 2018 Aug;38(6):658-672. doi: 10.1177/0272989X18782197.
2
Estimating a Preference-Based Single Index Measuring the Quality-of-Life Impact of Self-Management for Diabetes.估算偏好加权单一指数,衡量糖尿病自我管理对生活质量的影响。
Med Decis Making. 2018 Aug;38(6):699-707. doi: 10.1177/0272989X18784291. Epub 2018 Jun 29.
3
End-of-life healthcare expenditure: Testing economic explanations using a discrete choice experiment.临终医疗支出:使用离散选择实验检验经济解释。
J Health Econ. 2018 Jul;60:30-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2018.06.001. Epub 2018 Jun 7.
4
Comparing the Relative Importance of Attributes of Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Treatments to Patients and Physicians in the United States: A Discrete-Choice Experiment.比较转移性肾细胞癌治疗在美国患者和医生中的属性相对重要性:一项离散选择实验。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Aug;36(8):973-986. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0640-7.
5
The importance of population differences: Influence of individual characteristics on the Australian public's preferences for emergency care.人口差异的重要性:个体特征对澳大利亚公众对急救服务偏好的影响。
Health Policy. 2018 Feb;122(2):115-125. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.11.006. Epub 2017 Nov 17.
6
Selection of working correlation structure in generalized estimating equations.广义估计方程中工作相关结构的选择。
Stat Med. 2017 Jun 30;36(14):2206-2219. doi: 10.1002/sim.7262. Epub 2017 Feb 22.
7
Valuing QALYs in Relation to Equity Considerations Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.使用离散选择实验评估与公平考量相关的质量调整生命年
Pharmacoeconomics. 2015 Dec;33(12):1289-300. doi: 10.1007/s40273-015-0311-x.
8
Evaluating stakeholder's perspective on referred out genetic testing in Canada: a discrete choice experiment.
Clin Genet. 2016 Jan;89(1):133-8. doi: 10.1111/cge.12592. Epub 2015 Apr 29.
9
Are some QALYs more equal than others?有些质量调整生命年比其他的更平等吗?
Eur J Health Econ. 2016 Mar;17(2):117-27. doi: 10.1007/s10198-014-0657-6. Epub 2014 Dec 6.
10
Valuing health at the end of life: a stated preference discrete choice experiment.临终时对健康的重视:一项基于陈述偏好的离散选择实验。
Soc Sci Med. 2015 Jan;124:48-56. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.11.022. Epub 2014 Nov 13.