ArticleBMJ open2020
Understanding public preferences and trade-offs for government responses during a pandemic: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment in the UK.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development of a discrete choice experiment design to explore how patient characteristics influence preferred fixation method in total hip replacement in the UK.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- The value of social robots supporting informal care: a discrete choice experiment among informal caregivers.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- From polarity to plurality: Perceptions of COVID-19 and policy measures in England and Scotland.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- What do Iranians value most when choosing a hospital? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment.PloS one · 2024Article
- Investigating the influencing factors of vaccination decisions for newly developed and established vaccines: a comparative study based on latent class logit models in China.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Priority setting in the German healthcare system: results from a discrete choice experiment.International journal of health economics and management · 2023Article
- Are distributional preferences for safety stable? A longitudinal analysis before and after the COVID-19 outbreak.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2023Article
- Preferences for COVID-19 epidemic control measures among French adults: a discrete choice experiment.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Article
- Article
- Population preferences for non-pharmaceutical interventions to control the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: trade-offs among public health, individual rights, and economics.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022Article
- Applications of discrete choice experiments in COVID-19 research: Disparity in survey qualities between health and transport fields.Journal of choice modelling · 2022Article
- Public acceptability of non-pharmaceutical interventions to control a pandemic in the UK: a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2022Article
- United States COVID-19 Vaccination Preferences (CVP): 2020 Hindsight.The patient · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSocial distancing and lockdown measures are among the main government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. These measures aim to limit the COVID-19 infection rate and reduce the mortality rate of COVID-19. Given we are likely to see local lockdowns until a treatment or vaccine for COVID-19 is available, and their effectiveness depends on public acceptability, it is important to understand public preference for government responses. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using a discrete choice experiment (DCE), this study will investigate the public's preferences for pandemic responses in the UK. Attributes (and levels) are based on: (1) lockdown measures described in policy documents; (2) literature on preferences for lockdown measures and (3) a social media analysis. Attributes include: lockdown type; lockdown length; postponement of usual non-urgent medical care; number of excess deaths; number of infections; impact on household spending and job losses. We will prepilot the DCE using virtual think aloud interviews with respondents recruited via Facebook. We will collect preference data using an online survey of 4000 individuals from across the four UK countries (1000 per country). We will estimate the relative importance of the attributes, and the trade-offs individuals are willing to make between attributes. We will test if respondents' preferences differ based on moral attitudes (using the Moral Foundation Questionnaire), socioeconomic circumstances (age, education, economic insecurity, health status), country of residence and experience of COVID-19. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Aberdeen's College Ethics Research Board (CERB) has approved the study (reference: CERB/2020/6/1974). We will seek CERB approval for major changes from the developmental and pilot work. Peer-reviewed papers will be submitted, and results will be presented at public health and health economic conferences nationally and internationally. A lay summary will be published on the Health Economics Research Unit blog.
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.