Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35696072›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2022

Considerations Around Coding the Membership Probability Function in a Latent Class Analysis: Renewed Insights.

Marco Boeri, Brett Hauber, Joseph C Cappelleri

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marco BoeriHealth Preference Assessment, RTI Health Solutions, 123B Forsyth House, Cromac Square, Belfast, BT2 8LA, Northern Ireland, UK. mboeri@rti.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7346-2132
Brett HauberPfizer, Inc., New York, NY, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3129-7268
Joseph C CappelleriStatistics, Pfizer, Inc., Groton, CT, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9586-0748

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This technical note discusses how dummy and effects coding of categorical respondent characteristics in a class membership probability function should be interpreted by researchers employing a latent class analysis to explore preference heterogeneity in a discrete-choice experiment. Previous work highlighted issues arising from such coding when interpreting an alternative specific constant that represents an opt-out alternative or current situation in a discrete-choice experiment and did not fully address how this coding impacts the interpretation of parameters resulting from the membership probability function in a latent class analysis. Although latent class membership probability could be predicted separately for each respondent or subgroup of respondents, conclusions are often drawn directly from the model estimation using the full sample, which requires correctly interpreting the estimated parameters. In these cases, the misinterpretation that may arise if the problem is ignored could impact the policy conclusions and recommendations drawn based on the discrete-choice experiment results. This note provides an example comparing dummy and effects coding used to model respondent characteristics in the membership probability function in a discrete-choice experiment aimed to explore preferences for the treatment of chronic pain in the USA.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorPatient PreferenceHumansLatent Class AnalysisLikelihood FunctionsSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.