SynthesisInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2016
Discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services: a systematic review.
Synthesis in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient Preferences for Pharmacy Services: A Systematic Review of Studies Based on Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2024Pooled it
- Conjoint analyses of patients' preferences for primary care: a systematic review.BMC primary care · 2022Pooled it
- Best-Worst Scaling and the Prioritization of Objects in Health: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Pooled it
- Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Accounting for Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare-Related Discrete Choice Experiments when Comparing Stated Preferences: A Systematic Review.The patient · 2018Pooled it
- Using Latent Class Analysis to Model Preference Heterogeneity in Health: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Young Women's Stated Preferences for Biomedical HIV Prevention: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment in Kenya and South Africa.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2019Trial
- Predicting pharmacy choice for managed care network design.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2026Article
- Preferences for group psychological interventions on perinatal depression in China: a discrete choice experiment.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Article
- Information needs preferences of Chinese colorectal cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: A discrete choice experiment.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2024Article
- Residents Preferences for Pharmacist-Managed Clinic in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Parental preferences for the procedural sedation of children in dentistry: a discrete choice experiment.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Couples' Preferences for "2 in 1" Multipurpose Prevention Technologies to Prevent Both HIV and Pregnancy: Results of a Discrete Choice Experiment in Uganda and Zimbabwe.AIDS and behavior · 2022Article
- Identifying New Zealand Public Preferences for Pharmacist Prescribers in Primary Care: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2022Article
- Preferences for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus for Medications in Shandong Province, China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
- Job preferences of undergraduate pharmacy students in China: a discrete choice experiment.Human resources for health · 2021Article
- Identifying Community Pharmacist Preferences For Prescribing Services in Primary Care in New Zealand: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Applied health economics and health policy · 2021Article
- Article
- Preferences for long-acting Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention among South African youth: results of a discrete choice experiment.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Two previous systematic reviews have summarised the application of discrete choice experiments to value preferences for pharmacy services. These reviews identified a total of twelve studies and described how discrete choice experiments have been used to value pharmacy services but did not describe or discuss the application of methods used in the design or analysis. Aims (1) To update the most recent systematic review and critically appraise current discrete choice experiments of pharmacy services in line with published reporting criteria and; (2) To provide an overview of key methodological developments in the design and analysis of discrete choice experiments. Methods The review used a comprehensive strategy to identify eligible studies (published between 1990 and 2015) by searching electronic databases for key terms related to discrete choice and best-worst scaling (BWS) experiments. All healthcare choice experiments were then hand-searched for key terms relating to pharmacy. Data were extracted using a published checklist. Results A total of 17 discrete choice experiments eliciting preferences for pharmacy services were identified for inclusion in the review. No BWS studies were identified. The studies elicited preferences from a variety of populations (pharmacists, patients, students) for a range of pharmacy services. Most studies were from a United Kingdom setting, although examples from Europe, Australia and North America were also identified. Discrete choice experiments for pharmacy services tended to include more attributes than non-pharmacy choice experiments. Few studies reported the use of qualitative research methods in the design and interpretation of the experiments (n = 9) or use of new methods of analysis to identify and quantify preference and scale heterogeneity (n = 4). No studies reported the use of Bayesian methods in their experimental design. Conclusion Incorporating more sophisticated methods in the design of pharmacy-related discrete choice experiments could help researchers produce more efficient experiments which are better suited to valuing complex pharmacy services. Pharmacy-related discrete choice experiments could also benefit from more sophisticated analytical techniques such as investigations into scale and preference heterogeneity. Employing these sophisticated methods for both design and analysis could extend the usefulness of discrete choice experiments to inform health and pharmacy policy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26610687What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.