Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36169764›Full record

SynthesisThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2023

The application of discrete choice experiments eliciting young peoples' preferences for healthcare: a systematic literature review.

Galina Williams, Irina Kinchin

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

2 authors.

Galina WilliamsSchool of Business, Accounting and Law, CQUniversity, Brisbane, Australia. g.williams@cqu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1645-6104
Irina KinchinCentre for Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, The University of Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesUnderstanding young people's preferences for healthcare is critical for reducing the negative effect of undesirable choices. This review aims to synthesise the evidence obtained from discrete choice experiments (DCEs) eliciting young people's preferences for healthcare interventions and service deliveries, specifically, to (1) examine the methodology, including a selection of attributes and levels, experimental design, estimation procedure and validity; (2) evaluate similarities, differences and rigour of designs to the general population DCEs; and, (3) compare the DCEs' application to the seven health priority areas defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

methodsA systematic review searching Medline, EconLIT, PsychINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed up until May 2021. INCLUSION CRITERIA: a DCE, eliciting young peoples' preferences (10-24 years of age), on a healthcare-related topic defined by WHO, peer-reviewed, full-text available in English. A bespoke checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies.

resultsEighteen DCE studies were included in the review, exploring interventions and service in sexual and reproductive health (n = 9; 50%), smoking cessation (n = 4; 22%), mental health (n = 1), nutrition (n = 1), unintentional injuries (n = 1), vaccination against severe but rare diseases (n = 1); and diabetes (n = 1). Compared to the general population, DCEs eliciting young people's preferences had a high proportion of monetary measures and a smaller number of choices per respondent with the overwhelming number of surveys using fractional factorial design. The majority of studies were of moderate quality (50-75% of the criteria met).

conclusionsWhile identified DCEs touched on most health priority areas, the scope was limited. The conduct and reporting of DCEs with young people could be improved by including the state-of-the-art design, estimation procedures and analysis.

Indexed as

ChecklistMental HealthAdolescentChoice BehaviorDelivery of Health CareHumansPatient PreferenceRare DiseasesResearch DesignAdolescentsDiscrete choice experimentHealth policyHealth servicesStated preferencesYouth

Identifiers

PMID36169764
PMCPMC10290600

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.