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.
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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing a prospective ethical governance framework for a discrete choice experiment involving children aged 6-12 years: the PREF-ANX Kids study.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- A study protocol for co-designing risk communication strategies for hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing among priority populations in Johannesburg district, Gauteng, South Africa.Discover public health · 2026Article
- Individual Preference for Fecal Immunochemical Test Options among Younger Adults: A Discrete Choice Experiment.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Eliciting and Anchoring Health State Preferences Using Discrete Choice Experiments Among Adults, Adolescents, and Children.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Optimising HIV and related SRH service delivery for adolescents and young adults: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Preferences for Nonpharmaceutical Interventions During the Endemic Phase of COVID-19: Discrete Choice Experiment.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025Article
- Article
- Job incentives influencing health professionals working in rural and remote areas in Thailand: finding from discrete choice experiment to policy recommendation.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Article
- "I want one nurse who is friendly to talk to me properly like a friend": Learner preferences for HIV and contraceptive service provision in Gauteng, South Africa.Research square · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.