Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42844538›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2026

Ordinal relationship of composite time trade-off and discrete choice experiment preference data.

Ling-Hsiang Chuang, Carl Lundberg, Sun Sun, Klas-Göran Sahlen, Paul Kind

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2026. 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

5 authors.

Ling-Hsiang ChuangLHC Healthcare Consultancy, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8043-0411
Carl LundbergDepartment of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Sun SunDepartment of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. sun.sun@umu.se.
Klas-Göran SahlenDepartment of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Paul KindAcademic Unit of Health Economics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Funding

EuroQol Research Foundation 241-RA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesCommensurability between the preference data derived from composite time trade-off (cTTO) and discrete choice experiment (DCE) is unknown. There is considerable information asymmetry associated with cTTO and DCE data; the single comparable property common to both cTTO and DCE, testable at the individual respondent level, is limited to the directional preference of health state A over health state B. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the ordinal relationship between cTTO and DCE data generated by individual respondents.

methodsA survey, using the EQ-VT platform, was conducted, where each participant answered a set of 10 cTTO and 12 DCE questions. Data was collected from members of the Swedish general public. Analyses focused on the agreement between implied ordinal rankings of pairs of states based on individual's cTTO values, and their explicit ranking when presented as a DCE pair. The observed disagreement was further compared with theoretical benchmarks estimated as the probability of choosing an unexpected state due to random errors under the Random Utility Theory.

resultsThe analysis sample consisted of 226 interviews. Amongst all compared pairs, the total agreement was 65%; of the remaining 35%, the pairs with tied cTTO values made up 22%. Stratifying by differences in cTTO scores of pairs (Δ cTTO scores), agreements did not continue to increase with increasing Δ cTTO scores-staying around 90% for subgroups with larger Δ cTTO scores. Compared to benchmarks, divergences of two methods were present around pairs with tied values and those involving health states worse than dead.

conclusioncTTO and DCE preference data each possesses their own attributes, shaped by each unique procedural element. Combining such preference data needs a clear rationale based on explicit grounds. The findings of the current study suggest that there exist some methodological divergences between cTTO and DCE. To be able to safely combine both data and to maximize the potential of the hybrid model, first these divergences should be carefully reviewed and justified.

Indexed as

Discrete choice experimentEQ-5DEQ-VTHybrid modelTime trade-off

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.