ArticleThe patient2018
Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare Discrete Choice Experiments: A Primer.
Article in The patient, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 4 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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Preferences for AI-Enabled Health Care Technologies: Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments and Reporting Quality Assessment Using the DIRECT Checklist.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Current Practices for Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: 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
- Do preferences differ based on respondent experience of a health issue and its treatment? A case study using a public health intervention.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Trial
- Benefit-Risk or Risk-Benefit Trade-Offs? Another Look at Attribute Ordering Effects in a Pilot Choice Experiment.The patient · 2021Trial
- Guidance or Misdirection? Unpacking the Role of Feedback in Health Preference Assessments.Health economics · 2026Article
- Article
- Eliciting Patient-Centric Value Parameters: A National Best-Worst Scaling Profile Case Survey for Second-Line Antidiabetic Drugs in China.The patient · 2026Article
- Physician Preferences for Universal Routine Depression Screening for Adolescents in Primary Care.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Identifying and Managing Fraudulent Respondents in Online Stated Preferences Surveys: A Case Example from Best-Worst Scaling in Health Preferences Research.The patient · 2025Article
- Preferences in adolescents and young people's sexual and reproductive health services in Nigeria: a discrete choice experiment.Health economics review · 2024Article
- Can the General Public Be a Proxy for an "At-Risk" Group in a Patient Preference Study? A Disease Prevention Example in Rheumatoid Arthritis.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Comparison of Preferences and Data Quality between Discrete Choice Experiments Conducted in Online and Face-to-Face Respondents.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023Article
- Article
- A Comparison of Ordered Categorical versus Discrete Choices within a Stated Preference Survey of Whole-Blood Donors.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2023Article
- Public preferences for online medical consultations in China: a discrete choice experiment.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- A Comparison of Caregiver and Patient Preferences for Treating Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.The patient · 2022Article
- Towards Personalising the Use of Biologics in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2022Article
- Preferences for private health insurance in China: A discrete choice experiment.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are used to quantify the preferences of specified sample populations for different aspects of a good or service and are increasingly used to value interventions and services related to healthcare. Systematic reviews of healthcare DCEs have focussed on the trends over time of specific design issues and changes in the approach to analysis, with a more recent move towards consideration of a specific type of variation in preferences within the sample population, called taste heterogeneity, noting rises in the popularity of mixed logit and latent class models. Another type of variation, called scale heterogeneity, which relates to differences in the randomness of choice behaviour, may also account for some of the observed 'differences' in preference weights. The issue of scale heterogeneity becomes particularly important when comparing preferences across subgroups of the sample population as apparent differences in preferences could be due to taste and/or choice consistency. This primer aims to define and describe the relevance of scale heterogeneity in a healthcare context, and illustrate key points, with a simulated data set provided to readers in the Online appendix.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29032437What 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.