ArticleHealth economics2026
Guidance or Misdirection? Unpacking the Role of Feedback in Health Preference Assessments.
Article in Health economics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated the impact of providing feedback to respondents on a dominance-structured choice task on subsequent choice behavior in a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The DCE was conducted among 626 patients with heart failure. Respondents were given a dominance-structured choice task in which two devices (Device A and Device B) offered no benefits but carried risks compared to a "No Device" option. Among those who selected a device option (N = 340), half received feedback and an opportunity to revise their choice, while the other half did not. The effect of feedback on preference for the "No Device" option and choice consistency was examined using multinomial, heteroscedastic multinomial logit, and heteroscedastic latent-class logit models. Among those who received feedback (N = 170), 71% continued to choose the device options. Feedback recipients were more likely to choose the "No Device" option in subsequent questions (p < 0.01). Feedback led to a 25% reduction in choice consistency (p < 0.01) and an increased likelihood of choosing the "No Device" option. Impact on consistency varied across latent classes: feedback decreased consistency in the risk-sensitive class but increased consistency in the anti-device class, highlighting potential unintended consequences. Further research is needed to understand its effects in different contexts and samples.
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.