ArticleHealth economics2016
Parameterising User Uptake in Economic Evaluations: The role of discrete choice experiments.
Article in Health economics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 3 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Public Preferences for Genetic and Genomic Risk-Informed Chronic Disease Screening and Early Detection: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- Preferences for aspects of antenatal and newborn screening: a systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Pooled it
- How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018Pooled it
- Heterogeneity of patient preferences for long-acting HIV treatment among people with HIV in Kenya.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Understanding the preferences of younger women for the delivery of a service to predict breast cancer risk: a discrete choice experiment.BJC reports · 2026Article
- A socially interdependent choice framework for social influences in healthcare decision-making: a study protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- A modelling framework for translating discrete choice experiment results into cost-effectiveness estimates: an application to designing tailored and scalable HIV and contraceptive services for adolescents in Gauteng, South Africa.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Article
- Feasibility and acceptability of integrating hepatitis B care into routine HIV services: a qualitative study among health care providers and patients in West Nile region, Uganda.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Patient Preferences for Longer or More Frequent In-Center Hemodialysis Regimens: A Multicenter Discrete Choice Study.American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation · 2022Article
- Understanding Uptake of Digital Health Products: Methodology Tutorial for a Discrete Choice Experiment Using the Bayesian Efficient Design.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Measuring commissioners' willingness-to-pay for community based childhood obesity prevention programmes using a discrete choice experiment.BMC public health · 2020Article
- HIV prevention is not all about HIV - using a discrete choice experiment among women to model how the uptake and effectiveness of HIV prevention products may also rely on pregnancy and STI protection.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Article
- Does a Patient-Directed Financial Incentive Affect Patient Choices About Controller Medicines for Asthma? A Discrete Choice Experiment and Financial Impact Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Article
- The cost-effectiveness of multi-purpose HIV and pregnancy prevention technologies in South Africa.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2018Article
- Specialty training for the retention of Malawian doctors: A cost-effectiveness analysis.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2017Article
- Preferences for Health Interventions: Improving Uptake, Adherence, and Efficiency.The patient · 2017Article
- Article
- Article
- Incorporating Demand and Supply Constraints into Economic Evaluations in Low-Income and Middle-Income Countries.Health economics · 2016Article
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
Model-based economic evaluations of new interventions have shown that user behaviour (uptake) is a critical driver of overall impact achieved. However, early economic evaluations, prior to introduction, often rely on assumed levels of uptake based on expert opinion or uptake of similar interventions. In addition to the likely uncertainty surrounding these uptake assumptions, they also do not allow for uptake to be a function of product, intervention, or user characteristics. This letter proposes using uptake projections from discrete choice experiments (DCE) to better parameterize uptake and substitution in cost-effectiveness models. A simple impact model is developed and illustrated using an example from the HIV prevention field in South Africa. Comparison between the conventional approach and the DCE-based approach shows that, in our example, DCE-based impact predictions varied by up to 50% from conventional estimates and provided far more nuanced projections. In the absence of observed uptake data and to model the effect of variations in intervention characteristics, DCE-based uptake predictions are likely to greatly improve models parameterizing uptake solely based on expert opinion. This is particularly important for global and national level decision making around introducing new and probably more expensive interventions, particularly where resources are most constrained.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.