将受访者驱动的抽样纳入基于网络的离散选择实验:对COVID-19缓解措施的偏好。

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Courtney A Johnson, Dan N Tran, Ann Mwangi, Sandra G Sosa-Rubí, Carlos Chivardi, Martín Romero-Martínez, Sonak Pastakia, Elisha Robinson, Larissa Jennings Mayo-Wilson, Omar Galárraga
{"title":"将受访者驱动的抽样纳入基于网络的离散选择实验:对COVID-19缓解措施的偏好。","authors":"Courtney A Johnson,&nbsp;Dan N Tran,&nbsp;Ann Mwangi,&nbsp;Sandra G Sosa-Rubí,&nbsp;Carlos Chivardi,&nbsp;Martín Romero-Martínez,&nbsp;Sonak Pastakia,&nbsp;Elisha Robinson,&nbsp;Larissa Jennings Mayo-Wilson,&nbsp;Omar Galárraga","doi":"10.1007/s10742-021-00266-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To slow the spread of COVID-19, most countries implemented stay-at-home orders, social distancing, and other nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. To understand individual preferences for mitigation strategies, we piloted a web-based Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) approach to recruit participants from four universities in three countries to complete a computer-based Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). Use of these methods, in combination, can serve to increase the external validity of a study by enabling recruitment of populations underrepresented in sampling frames, thus allowing preference results to be more generalizable to targeted subpopulations. A total of 99 students or staff members were invited to complete the survey, of which 72% started the survey (n = 71). Sixty-three participants (89% of starters) completed all tasks in the DCE. A rank-ordered mixed logit model was used to estimate preferences for COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. The model estimates indicated that participants preferred mitigation strategies that resulted in lower COVID-19 risk (i.e. sheltering-in-place more days a week), financial compensation from the government, fewer health (mental and physical) problems, and fewer financial problems. The high response rate and survey engagement provide proof of concept that RDS and DCE can be implemented as web-based applications, with the potential for scale up to produce nationally-representative preference estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":45600,"journal":{"name":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8747856/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incorporating respondent-driven sampling into web-based discrete choice experiments: preferences for COVID-19 mitigation measures.\",\"authors\":\"Courtney A Johnson,&nbsp;Dan N Tran,&nbsp;Ann Mwangi,&nbsp;Sandra G Sosa-Rubí,&nbsp;Carlos Chivardi,&nbsp;Martín Romero-Martínez,&nbsp;Sonak Pastakia,&nbsp;Elisha Robinson,&nbsp;Larissa Jennings Mayo-Wilson,&nbsp;Omar Galárraga\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10742-021-00266-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To slow the spread of COVID-19, most countries implemented stay-at-home orders, social distancing, and other nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. To understand individual preferences for mitigation strategies, we piloted a web-based Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) approach to recruit participants from four universities in three countries to complete a computer-based Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). Use of these methods, in combination, can serve to increase the external validity of a study by enabling recruitment of populations underrepresented in sampling frames, thus allowing preference results to be more generalizable to targeted subpopulations. A total of 99 students or staff members were invited to complete the survey, of which 72% started the survey (n = 71). Sixty-three participants (89% of starters) completed all tasks in the DCE. A rank-ordered mixed logit model was used to estimate preferences for COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. The model estimates indicated that participants preferred mitigation strategies that resulted in lower COVID-19 risk (i.e. sheltering-in-place more days a week), financial compensation from the government, fewer health (mental and physical) problems, and fewer financial problems. The high response rate and survey engagement provide proof of concept that RDS and DCE can be implemented as web-based applications, with the potential for scale up to produce nationally-representative preference estimates.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45600,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8747856/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-021-00266-4\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10742-021-00266-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

为了减缓COVID-19的传播,大多数国家实施了居家令、保持社交距离和其他非药物缓解策略。为了了解个体对缓解策略的偏好,我们试点了一种基于网络的受访者驱动抽样(RDS)方法,从三个国家的四所大学招募参与者来完成基于计算机的离散选择实验(DCE)。结合使用这些方法,可以通过在抽样框架中招募代表性不足的群体来增加研究的外部有效性,从而使偏好结果更容易推广到目标亚群体。共邀请99名学生或教职员完成调查,其中72%的学生或教职员开始调查(n = 71)。63名参与者(89%的初学者)完成了DCE中的所有任务。使用秩序混合logit模型来估计对COVID-19非药物缓解策略的偏好。模型估计表明,参与者更喜欢能够降低COVID-19风险的缓解策略(即每周有更多的时间在原地避难)、政府的经济补偿、更少的健康(精神和身体)问题以及更少的财务问题。高回复率和调查参与度证明了RDS和DCE可以作为基于网络的应用程序实施,并具有扩大规模以产生具有全国代表性的偏好估计的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Incorporating respondent-driven sampling into web-based discrete choice experiments: preferences for COVID-19 mitigation measures.

Incorporating respondent-driven sampling into web-based discrete choice experiments: preferences for COVID-19 mitigation measures.

Incorporating respondent-driven sampling into web-based discrete choice experiments: preferences for COVID-19 mitigation measures.

To slow the spread of COVID-19, most countries implemented stay-at-home orders, social distancing, and other nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. To understand individual preferences for mitigation strategies, we piloted a web-based Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) approach to recruit participants from four universities in three countries to complete a computer-based Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE). Use of these methods, in combination, can serve to increase the external validity of a study by enabling recruitment of populations underrepresented in sampling frames, thus allowing preference results to be more generalizable to targeted subpopulations. A total of 99 students or staff members were invited to complete the survey, of which 72% started the survey (n = 71). Sixty-three participants (89% of starters) completed all tasks in the DCE. A rank-ordered mixed logit model was used to estimate preferences for COVID-19 nonpharmaceutical mitigation strategies. The model estimates indicated that participants preferred mitigation strategies that resulted in lower COVID-19 risk (i.e. sheltering-in-place more days a week), financial compensation from the government, fewer health (mental and physical) problems, and fewer financial problems. The high response rate and survey engagement provide proof of concept that RDS and DCE can be implemented as web-based applications, with the potential for scale up to produce nationally-representative preference estimates.

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
Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology
Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The journal reflects the multidisciplinary nature of the field of health services and outcomes research. It addresses the needs of multiple, interlocking communities, including methodologists in statistics, econometrics, social and behavioral sciences; designers and analysts of health policy and health services research projects; and health care providers and policy makers who need to properly understand and evaluate the results of published research. The journal strives to enhance the level of methodologic rigor in health services and outcomes research and contributes to the development of methodologic standards in the field. In pursuing its main objective, the journal also provides a meeting ground for researchers from a number of traditional disciplines and fosters the development of new quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods by statisticians, econometricians, health services researchers, and methodologists in other fields. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology publishes: Research papers on quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods; Case Studies describing applications of quantitative and qualitative methodology in health services and outcomes research; Review Articles synthesizing and popularizing methodologic developments; Tutorials; Articles on computational issues and software reviews; Book reviews; and Notices. Special issues will be devoted to papers presented at important workshops and conferences.
×
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