The Performance of Kaizen Tasks Across Three Online Discrete Choice Experiment Surveys: An Evidence Synthesis.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Benjamin Matthew Craig, Maksat Jumamyradov, Oliver Rivero-Arias
{"title":"The Performance of Kaizen Tasks Across Three Online Discrete Choice Experiment Surveys: An Evidence Synthesis.","authors":"Benjamin Matthew Craig, Maksat Jumamyradov, Oliver Rivero-Arias","doi":"10.1007/s40271-024-00708-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Kaizen is a Japanese term for continuous improvement (kai ~ change, zen ~ good). In a kaizen task, a respondent makes sequential choices to improve an object's profile, revealing a preference path. Including kaizen tasks in a discrete choice experiment has the advantage of collecting greater preference evidence than pick-one tasks, such as paired comparisons. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: So far, three online discrete choice experiments have included kaizen tasks: the 2020 US COVID-19 vaccination (CVP) study, the 2021 UK Children's Surgery Outcome Reporting (CSOR) study, and the 2023 US EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation (Y-3L) study. In this evidence synthesis, we describe the performance of the kaizen tasks in terms of response behaviors, conditional logit and Zermelo-Bradley-Terry (ZBT) estimates, and their standard errors in each of the surveys.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing the CVP and Y-3L, including hold-outs (i.e., attributes shared by all alternatives) seems to reduce positional behavior by half. The CVP tasks excluded multi-level improvements; therefore, we could not estimate logit main effects directly. In the CSOR, only 12 of the 21 logit estimates are significantly positive (p < 0.05), possibly due to the fixed attribute order. All Y-3L estimates are significantly positive, and their predictions are highly correlated (Pearson: logit 0.802, ZBT 0.882) and strongly agree (Lin: logit 0.744, ZBT 0.852) with the paired-comparison probabilities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These discrete choice experiments offer important lessons for future studies: (1) include warm-up tasks, hold-outs, and multi-level improvements; (2) randomize the attribute order (i.e., up-down) at the respondent level; and (3) recruit smaller samples of respondents than traditional discrete choice experiments with only pick-one tasks.</p>","PeriodicalId":51271,"journal":{"name":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11461645/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-024-00708-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Kaizen is a Japanese term for continuous improvement (kai ~ change, zen ~ good). In a kaizen task, a respondent makes sequential choices to improve an object's profile, revealing a preference path. Including kaizen tasks in a discrete choice experiment has the advantage of collecting greater preference evidence than pick-one tasks, such as paired comparisons. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: So far, three online discrete choice experiments have included kaizen tasks: the 2020 US COVID-19 vaccination (CVP) study, the 2021 UK Children's Surgery Outcome Reporting (CSOR) study, and the 2023 US EQ-5D-Y-3L valuation (Y-3L) study. In this evidence synthesis, we describe the performance of the kaizen tasks in terms of response behaviors, conditional logit and Zermelo-Bradley-Terry (ZBT) estimates, and their standard errors in each of the surveys.

Results: Comparing the CVP and Y-3L, including hold-outs (i.e., attributes shared by all alternatives) seems to reduce positional behavior by half. The CVP tasks excluded multi-level improvements; therefore, we could not estimate logit main effects directly. In the CSOR, only 12 of the 21 logit estimates are significantly positive (p < 0.05), possibly due to the fixed attribute order. All Y-3L estimates are significantly positive, and their predictions are highly correlated (Pearson: logit 0.802, ZBT 0.882) and strongly agree (Lin: logit 0.744, ZBT 0.852) with the paired-comparison probabilities.

Conclusions: These discrete choice experiments offer important lessons for future studies: (1) include warm-up tasks, hold-outs, and multi-level improvements; (2) randomize the attribute order (i.e., up-down) at the respondent level; and (3) recruit smaller samples of respondents than traditional discrete choice experiments with only pick-one tasks.

Abstract Image

三项在线离散选择实验调查中Kaizen任务的表现:证据综述》。
背景介绍Kaizen(改善)是一个日语术语,意为持续改进(kai ~ change,zen ~ good)。在 "改善 "任务中,被调查者会做出连续的选择来改善对象的特征,从而揭示出偏好路径。在离散选择实验中加入 "改善 "任务,与成对比较等 "选择一 "任务相比,具有收集更多偏好证据的优势。目的与方法:迄今为止,有三个在线离散选择实验包含了改进任务:2020 年美国 COVID-19 疫苗接种(CVP)研究、2021 年英国儿童手术结果报告(CSOR)研究和 2023 年美国 EQ-5D-Y-3L 估值(Y-3L)研究。在本证据综述中,我们从响应行为、条件对数、Zermelo-Bradley-Terry(ZBT)估计值及其标准误差等方面描述了每项调查中kaizen任务的表现:比较 CVP 和 Y-3L 两种方法,将 "保留"(即所有备选方案都具有的属性)纳入其中似乎会使定位行为减少一半。CVP 任务不包括多层次改进;因此,我们无法直接估计 logit 主效应。在 CSOR 中,21 个 logit 估计值中只有 12 个显著为正(p < 0.05),这可能是固定属性顺序造成的。所有 Y-3L 估计值均为显著正值,其预测值与配对比较概率高度相关(Pearson:logit 0.802,ZBT 0.882)且非常一致(Lin:logit 0.744,ZBT 0.852):这些离散选择实验为今后的研究提供了重要的借鉴:(1) 包括热身任务、暂停和多层次改进;(2) 在受访者层面随机化属性顺序(即上-下);(3) 与传统的仅有选一任务的离散选择实验相比,招募更小的受访者样本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research
Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
8.30%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Patient provides a venue for scientifically rigorous, timely, and relevant research to promote the development, evaluation and implementation of therapies, technologies, and innovations that will enhance the patient experience. It is an international forum for research that advances and/or applies qualitative or quantitative methods to promote the generation, synthesis, or interpretation of evidence. The journal has specific interest in receiving original research, reviews and commentaries related to qualitative and mixed methods research, stated-preference methods, patient reported outcomes, and shared decision making. Advances in regulatory science, patient-focused drug development, patient-centered benefit-risk and health technology assessment will also be considered. Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in The Patient may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances. All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信