优化SF-6Dv2健康状态评估的演示格式:一项使用认知访谈的定性研究。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jahyun Cho, Eun-Young Bae, Min-Woo Jo, Minsu Ock
{"title":"优化SF-6Dv2健康状态评估的演示格式:一项使用认知访谈的定性研究。","authors":"Jahyun Cho, Eun-Young Bae, Min-Woo Jo, Minsu Ock","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-04036-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The SF-6Dv2 health status valuation using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) method requires effective presentation strategies to improve respondents' overall understanding and reduce bias, particularly in online surveys. This study aimed to determine the optimal presentation formats for DCE choice tasks through qualitative interviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted cognitive interviews with 40 South Korean adults using the think-aloud and retrospective probing methods. Participants evaluated five presentation formats (non-emphasized, bold-underlined, yellow-highlighted, graphic circle, and color-shaded) and two duration attribute placement options (upfront vs. end).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings revealed that the presentation format influenced three key areas: readability, comprehension, and comparative judgment. The yellow-highlighted format was the most preferred (50%), followed by the bold-underlined (37.5%) and graphic circle formats (25%), with multiple responses allowed. However, the yellow-highlighted format was criticized for being a visual burden and overlooking non-highlighted information, while the graphic format had issues such as scale direction confusion and inappropriate level summation across attributes. Meanwhile, the bold-underlined format was described easy to read, helpful in grasping the meaning quickly, and visually balanced, thereby reducing visual overload. Moreover, it supported comparative judgment by allowing users to clearly distinguish and compare domains without cognitive fatigue. Regarding duration placement, 26 participants preferred upfront placement, stating that it provided essential context for evaluation. Interestingly, the participants preferring upfront placement prioritized survival duration, while those preferring end placement emphasized the quality of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the yellow-highlighted, bold-underlined, and graphic formats improved comprehension, we recommend the bold-underlined format for future SF-6Dv2 valuation studies as it balances comprehension enhancement with greater stability in choice contexts. The findings also suggest that the presentation format has the potential to influence DCE response patterns, warranting further consideration in survey design.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimizing presentation formats for SF-6Dv2 health status valuation: a qualitative study using cognitive interviews.\",\"authors\":\"Jahyun Cho, Eun-Young Bae, Min-Woo Jo, Minsu Ock\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11136-025-04036-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The SF-6Dv2 health status valuation using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) method requires effective presentation strategies to improve respondents' overall understanding and reduce bias, particularly in online surveys. This study aimed to determine the optimal presentation formats for DCE choice tasks through qualitative interviews.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted cognitive interviews with 40 South Korean adults using the think-aloud and retrospective probing methods. Participants evaluated five presentation formats (non-emphasized, bold-underlined, yellow-highlighted, graphic circle, and color-shaded) and two duration attribute placement options (upfront vs. end).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings revealed that the presentation format influenced three key areas: readability, comprehension, and comparative judgment. The yellow-highlighted format was the most preferred (50%), followed by the bold-underlined (37.5%) and graphic circle formats (25%), with multiple responses allowed. However, the yellow-highlighted format was criticized for being a visual burden and overlooking non-highlighted information, while the graphic format had issues such as scale direction confusion and inappropriate level summation across attributes. Meanwhile, the bold-underlined format was described easy to read, helpful in grasping the meaning quickly, and visually balanced, thereby reducing visual overload. Moreover, it supported comparative judgment by allowing users to clearly distinguish and compare domains without cognitive fatigue. Regarding duration placement, 26 participants preferred upfront placement, stating that it provided essential context for evaluation. Interestingly, the participants preferring upfront placement prioritized survival duration, while those preferring end placement emphasized the quality of life.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the yellow-highlighted, bold-underlined, and graphic formats improved comprehension, we recommend the bold-underlined format for future SF-6Dv2 valuation studies as it balances comprehension enhancement with greater stability in choice contexts. The findings also suggest that the presentation format has the potential to influence DCE response patterns, warranting further consideration in survey design.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quality of Life Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quality of Life Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-04036-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-04036-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:使用离散选择实验(DCE)方法进行SF-6Dv2健康状态评估需要有效的呈现策略来提高被调查者的整体理解并减少偏见,特别是在在线调查中。本研究旨在通过质性访谈,确定最佳的DCE选择任务呈现格式。方法:对40名韩国成年人进行认知访谈,采用有声思考和回顾性探讨的方法。参与者评估了五种演示格式(非强调、粗体下划线、黄色高亮、图形圆圈和彩色阴影)和两种持续时间属性放置选项(前置和结束)。结果:研究结果显示,演示格式影响三个关键领域:可读性,理解和比较判断。黄色突出显示的格式是最受欢迎的(50%),其次是粗体下划线(37.5%)和图形圈格式(25%),允许多次回答。然而,黄色高亮显示的格式被批评为视觉负担,忽略了非高亮显示的信息,而图形格式存在刻度方向混乱和不适当的属性级别总和等问题。同时,加粗下划线的格式易于阅读,有助于快速掌握意思,视觉上平衡,从而减少视觉过载。此外,它支持比较判断,允许用户清晰地区分和比较领域,而不会产生认知疲劳。关于持续时间安排,26个与会者赞成预先安排,指出这为评价提供了必要的背景。有趣的是,喜欢前期安置的参与者优先考虑生存时间,而喜欢后期安置的参与者则强调生活质量。结论:虽然黄色突出显示、粗体下划线和图形格式提高了理解能力,但我们建议在未来的SF-6Dv2评估研究中使用粗体下划线格式,因为它在选择环境中平衡了理解能力的增强和更大的稳定性。研究结果还表明,陈述格式有可能影响DCE的反应模式,值得在调查设计中进一步考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimizing presentation formats for SF-6Dv2 health status valuation: a qualitative study using cognitive interviews.

Purpose: The SF-6Dv2 health status valuation using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) method requires effective presentation strategies to improve respondents' overall understanding and reduce bias, particularly in online surveys. This study aimed to determine the optimal presentation formats for DCE choice tasks through qualitative interviews.

Methods: We conducted cognitive interviews with 40 South Korean adults using the think-aloud and retrospective probing methods. Participants evaluated five presentation formats (non-emphasized, bold-underlined, yellow-highlighted, graphic circle, and color-shaded) and two duration attribute placement options (upfront vs. end).

Results: Findings revealed that the presentation format influenced three key areas: readability, comprehension, and comparative judgment. The yellow-highlighted format was the most preferred (50%), followed by the bold-underlined (37.5%) and graphic circle formats (25%), with multiple responses allowed. However, the yellow-highlighted format was criticized for being a visual burden and overlooking non-highlighted information, while the graphic format had issues such as scale direction confusion and inappropriate level summation across attributes. Meanwhile, the bold-underlined format was described easy to read, helpful in grasping the meaning quickly, and visually balanced, thereby reducing visual overload. Moreover, it supported comparative judgment by allowing users to clearly distinguish and compare domains without cognitive fatigue. Regarding duration placement, 26 participants preferred upfront placement, stating that it provided essential context for evaluation. Interestingly, the participants preferring upfront placement prioritized survival duration, while those preferring end placement emphasized the quality of life.

Conclusion: While the yellow-highlighted, bold-underlined, and graphic formats improved comprehension, we recommend the bold-underlined format for future SF-6Dv2 valuation studies as it balances comprehension enhancement with greater stability in choice contexts. The findings also suggest that the presentation format has the potential to influence DCE response patterns, warranting further consideration in survey design.

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
Quality of Life Research
Quality of Life Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
224
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences. Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership. This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信