中国不孕不育患者治疗偏好的离散选择实验与最佳-最差比例估算的实证比较》,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011 年。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Patient preference and adherence Pub Date : 2025-03-30 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/PPA.S501723
Jiali Chen, Xiaodan Qian, Dan Su, Jinhong Gong, Jingjing Shang, Lingli Zhang, Xin Li
{"title":"中国不孕不育患者治疗偏好的离散选择实验与最佳-最差比例估算的实证比较》,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2011 年。","authors":"Jiali Chen, Xiaodan Qian, Dan Su, Jinhong Gong, Jingjing Shang, Lingli Zhang, Xin Li","doi":"10.2147/PPA.S501723","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Infertility has become a growing public health problem in China. It is important to accurately and easily obtain patient preferences. This study aimed to obtain and compare stated preference results from the perspective of infertility patients. By assessing the validity and acceptability of both methods, it provides lessons for empirical research and practical application.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Discrete choice experiments (DCE) and profile case best-worst scaling (BWS-2) are methods used to identify and weigh various criteria affecting the order of priorities. We conducted a face-to-face survey of female patients with infertility aged between 20-45 years. The survey included socio-demographic information, preference questionnaires and completion of evaluation questions. Attributes included live birth rate, pregnancy rate, degree of participation in treatment decision making, maternal complications, neonatal complications and program cost. Conditional logit models were used to analyze attribute level weights and relative importance was calculated separately.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 330 valid questionnaires were collected. The preferences of patients experiencing infertility were quantified through two stated preference research methods. The findings indicated that patients exhibited a preference for treatment options that were highly effective, exhibited minimal side effects, were patient-centered, and were cost-effective. The BWS-2 and DCE preference weights demonstrated high consistency, with only slight difference observed in the ranking of individual attributes within the order of relative importance. In the view of the patients, the DCE questions were perceived to be less challenging to comprehend and were therefore preferred to be completed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BWS-2 and DCE exhibit identical validity and highly consistent preference results. In the context of specific research questions, the selection of a method or the combination of methods must be suitable to the purpose of the study in order to ensure that the utility gained is maximized. Further research is required to corroborate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":19972,"journal":{"name":"Patient preference and adherence","volume":"19 ","pages":"869-882"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11969040/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Empirical Comparison of Discrete Choice Experiment and Best-Worst Scaling to Estimate Patient Preferences in Infertility Treatment in China.\",\"authors\":\"Jiali Chen, Xiaodan Qian, Dan Su, Jinhong Gong, Jingjing Shang, Lingli Zhang, Xin Li\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/PPA.S501723\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Infertility has become a growing public health problem in China. It is important to accurately and easily obtain patient preferences. This study aimed to obtain and compare stated preference results from the perspective of infertility patients. By assessing the validity and acceptability of both methods, it provides lessons for empirical research and practical application.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Discrete choice experiments (DCE) and profile case best-worst scaling (BWS-2) are methods used to identify and weigh various criteria affecting the order of priorities. We conducted a face-to-face survey of female patients with infertility aged between 20-45 years. The survey included socio-demographic information, preference questionnaires and completion of evaluation questions. Attributes included live birth rate, pregnancy rate, degree of participation in treatment decision making, maternal complications, neonatal complications and program cost. Conditional logit models were used to analyze attribute level weights and relative importance was calculated separately.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 330 valid questionnaires were collected. The preferences of patients experiencing infertility were quantified through two stated preference research methods. The findings indicated that patients exhibited a preference for treatment options that were highly effective, exhibited minimal side effects, were patient-centered, and were cost-effective. The BWS-2 and DCE preference weights demonstrated high consistency, with only slight difference observed in the ranking of individual attributes within the order of relative importance. In the view of the patients, the DCE questions were perceived to be less challenging to comprehend and were therefore preferred to be completed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The BWS-2 and DCE exhibit identical validity and highly consistent preference results. In the context of specific research questions, the selection of a method or the combination of methods must be suitable to the purpose of the study in order to ensure that the utility gained is maximized. Further research is required to corroborate these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patient preference and adherence\",\"volume\":\"19 \",\"pages\":\"869-882\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11969040/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patient preference and adherence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S501723\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patient preference and adherence","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S501723","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:不孕不育已成为中国日益严重的公共卫生问题。准确和容易地获得患者的偏好是很重要的。本研究旨在从不孕症患者的角度获得并比较陈述的偏好结果。通过评估两种方法的有效性和可接受性,为实证研究和实际应用提供借鉴。方法:离散选择实验(DCE)和案例最佳-最差缩放(BWS-2)是用来识别和权衡影响优先顺序的各种标准的方法。我们对年龄在20-45岁的女性不孕症患者进行了面对面的调查。调查内容包括社会人口统计信息、偏好问卷和完成评估问题。属性包括活产率、妊娠率、参与治疗决策的程度、孕产妇并发症、新生儿并发症和项目成本。采用条件logit模型分析属性等级权重,分别计算相对重要度。结果:共回收有效问卷330份。通过两种明确的偏好研究方法量化不孕患者的偏好。研究结果表明,患者表现出对高效、副作用最小、以患者为中心、成本效益高的治疗方案的偏好。BWS-2和DCE的偏好权重具有较高的一致性,各属性的相对重要性排序差异不大。在患者看来,DCE的问题被认为是不太具有挑战性的理解,因此更倾向于完成。结论:BWS-2和DCE具有相同的效度和高度一致的偏好结果。在具体的研究问题的背景下,方法的选择或方法的组合必须适合于研究的目的,以确保获得的效用最大化。需要进一步的研究来证实这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Empirical Comparison of Discrete Choice Experiment and Best-Worst Scaling to Estimate Patient Preferences in Infertility Treatment in China.

Background: Infertility has become a growing public health problem in China. It is important to accurately and easily obtain patient preferences. This study aimed to obtain and compare stated preference results from the perspective of infertility patients. By assessing the validity and acceptability of both methods, it provides lessons for empirical research and practical application.

Methods: Discrete choice experiments (DCE) and profile case best-worst scaling (BWS-2) are methods used to identify and weigh various criteria affecting the order of priorities. We conducted a face-to-face survey of female patients with infertility aged between 20-45 years. The survey included socio-demographic information, preference questionnaires and completion of evaluation questions. Attributes included live birth rate, pregnancy rate, degree of participation in treatment decision making, maternal complications, neonatal complications and program cost. Conditional logit models were used to analyze attribute level weights and relative importance was calculated separately.

Results: A total of 330 valid questionnaires were collected. The preferences of patients experiencing infertility were quantified through two stated preference research methods. The findings indicated that patients exhibited a preference for treatment options that were highly effective, exhibited minimal side effects, were patient-centered, and were cost-effective. The BWS-2 and DCE preference weights demonstrated high consistency, with only slight difference observed in the ranking of individual attributes within the order of relative importance. In the view of the patients, the DCE questions were perceived to be less challenging to comprehend and were therefore preferred to be completed.

Conclusion: The BWS-2 and DCE exhibit identical validity and highly consistent preference results. In the context of specific research questions, the selection of a method or the combination of methods must be suitable to the purpose of the study in order to ensure that the utility gained is maximized. Further research is required to corroborate these findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Patient preference and adherence
Patient preference and adherence MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
4.50%
发文量
354
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Patient Preference and Adherence is an international, peer reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the growing importance of patient preference and adherence throughout the therapeutic continuum. The journal is characterized by the rapid reporting of reviews, original research, modeling and clinical studies across all therapeutic areas. Patient satisfaction, acceptability, quality of life, compliance, persistence and their role in developing new therapeutic modalities and compounds to optimize clinical outcomes for existing disease states are major areas of interest for the journal. As of 1st April 2019, Patient Preference and Adherence will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.
×
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