Measuring trade-offs in nephrology: A systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies

Michael D. Clark, Ala Szczepura, Anil Gumber, Kirsten Howard, Domenico Moro, Rachael L. Morton

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)
9 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background Discrete choice experiment (DCE), conjoint analysis or adaptive conjoint analysis methods are increasingly applied to obtain patient, clinician or community preferences in nephrology. This study systematically reviews the above-mentioned published choice studies providing an overview of the issues addressed, methods and findings. Methods Choice studies relating to nephrology were identified using electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsychINFO and Econlit from 1990 to 2015. For inclusion in the review, studies had to primarily relate to kidney disease and include results from statistical (econometric) analyses of respondents' choice or preference. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed against a range of systematic review criteria, and methods and results summarized. Results We identified 14 eligible studies from Europe, Australasia, North America and Asia, reporting preferences for treatment or screening, patient experiences, quality of life (QOL), health outcomes and priority-setting frameworks. Specific contexts included medical interventions in kidney transplantation and renal cell carcinoma, health policies for organ donation and allocation, dialysis modalities and end-of-life care, using a variety of statistical models. The characteristics of time' (i.e.Transplant waiting time, dialysis hours, transport time) and QOL (pre-and post-Transplant, or pre-and post-dialysis) consistently influenced patient and clinician preferences across the choice studies. Conclusions DCE are increasingly used to obtain information about key preferences in kidney transplantation and dialysis. These study methods provide quantitative information about respondents' trade-offs between conflicting clinical and policy objectives, and can establish how preferences vary among stakeholder groups.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)348-355
Number of pages8
JournalNephrology Dialysis Transplantation
Volume33
Issue number2
Early online date1 Feb 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Feb 2018

Fingerprint

Nephrology
Dialysis
Kidney Transplantation
Northern Asia
Quality of Life
Australasia
Transplants
Health Priorities
Tissue and Organ Procurement
Terminal Care
Patient Preference
Kidney Diseases
Statistical Models
Health Policy
North America
Renal Cell Carcinoma
Databases

Bibliographical note

This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for
publication in Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation following peer review. The
version of record Clark, MD, Szczepura, A, Gumber, A, Howard, K, Moro, D &
Morton, RL 2018, 'Measuring trade-offs in nephrology: A systematic review of
discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies' Nephrology Dialysis
Transplantation, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 348-355, is available online at:
https://academic.oup.com/ndt/article/33/2/348/2965824

Keywords

  • dialysis
  • discrete choice experiment
  • kidney disease
  • patient preferences
  • transplantation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nephrology
  • Transplantation

Cite this

Measuring trade-offs in nephrology : A systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies. / Clark, Michael D.; Szczepura, Ala; Gumber, Anil; Howard, Kirsten; Moro, Domenico; Morton, Rachael L.

In: Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, Vol. 33, No. 2, 01.02.2018, p. 348-355.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Clark, Michael D. ; Szczepura, Ala ; Gumber, Anil ; Howard, Kirsten ; Moro, Domenico ; Morton, Rachael L. / Measuring trade-offs in nephrology : A systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies. In: Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation. 2018 ; Vol. 33, No. 2. pp. 348-355.
@article{cb787849a2c24232ade87a09ab0db88a,
title = "Measuring trade-offs in nephrology: A systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies",
abstract = "Background Discrete choice experiment (DCE), conjoint analysis or adaptive conjoint analysis methods are increasingly applied to obtain patient, clinician or community preferences in nephrology. This study systematically reviews the above-mentioned published choice studies providing an overview of the issues addressed, methods and findings. Methods Choice studies relating to nephrology were identified using electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsychINFO and Econlit from 1990 to 2015. For inclusion in the review, studies had to primarily relate to kidney disease and include results from statistical (econometric) analyses of respondents' choice or preference. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed against a range of systematic review criteria, and methods and results summarized. Results We identified 14 eligible studies from Europe, Australasia, North America and Asia, reporting preferences for treatment or screening, patient experiences, quality of life (QOL), health outcomes and priority-setting frameworks. Specific contexts included medical interventions in kidney transplantation and renal cell carcinoma, health policies for organ donation and allocation, dialysis modalities and end-of-life care, using a variety of statistical models. The characteristics of time' (i.e.Transplant waiting time, dialysis hours, transport time) and QOL (pre-and post-Transplant, or pre-and post-dialysis) consistently influenced patient and clinician preferences across the choice studies. Conclusions DCE are increasingly used to obtain information about key preferences in kidney transplantation and dialysis. These study methods provide quantitative information about respondents' trade-offs between conflicting clinical and policy objectives, and can establish how preferences vary among stakeholder groups.",
keywords = "dialysis, discrete choice experiment, kidney disease, patient preferences, transplantation",
author = "Clark, {Michael D.} and Ala Szczepura and Anil Gumber and Kirsten Howard and Domenico Moro and Morton, {Rachael L.}",
note = "This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation following peer review. The version of record Clark, MD, Szczepura, A, Gumber, A, Howard, K, Moro, D & Morton, RL 2018, 'Measuring trade-offs in nephrology: A systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies' Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 348-355, is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/ndt/article/33/2/348/2965824",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/ndt/gfw436",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "348--355",
journal = "Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation",
issn = "0931-0509",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measuring trade-offs in nephrology

T2 - A systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies

AU - Clark, Michael D.

AU - Szczepura, Ala

AU - Gumber, Anil

AU - Howard, Kirsten

AU - Moro, Domenico

AU - Morton, Rachael L.

N1 - This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation following peer review. The version of record Clark, MD, Szczepura, A, Gumber, A, Howard, K, Moro, D & Morton, RL 2018, 'Measuring trade-offs in nephrology: A systematic review of discrete choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies' Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 348-355, is available online at: https://academic.oup.com/ndt/article/33/2/348/2965824

PY - 2018/2/1

Y1 - 2018/2/1

N2 - Background Discrete choice experiment (DCE), conjoint analysis or adaptive conjoint analysis methods are increasingly applied to obtain patient, clinician or community preferences in nephrology. This study systematically reviews the above-mentioned published choice studies providing an overview of the issues addressed, methods and findings. Methods Choice studies relating to nephrology were identified using electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsychINFO and Econlit from 1990 to 2015. For inclusion in the review, studies had to primarily relate to kidney disease and include results from statistical (econometric) analyses of respondents' choice or preference. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed against a range of systematic review criteria, and methods and results summarized. Results We identified 14 eligible studies from Europe, Australasia, North America and Asia, reporting preferences for treatment or screening, patient experiences, quality of life (QOL), health outcomes and priority-setting frameworks. Specific contexts included medical interventions in kidney transplantation and renal cell carcinoma, health policies for organ donation and allocation, dialysis modalities and end-of-life care, using a variety of statistical models. The characteristics of time' (i.e.Transplant waiting time, dialysis hours, transport time) and QOL (pre-and post-Transplant, or pre-and post-dialysis) consistently influenced patient and clinician preferences across the choice studies. Conclusions DCE are increasingly used to obtain information about key preferences in kidney transplantation and dialysis. These study methods provide quantitative information about respondents' trade-offs between conflicting clinical and policy objectives, and can establish how preferences vary among stakeholder groups.

AB - Background Discrete choice experiment (DCE), conjoint analysis or adaptive conjoint analysis methods are increasingly applied to obtain patient, clinician or community preferences in nephrology. This study systematically reviews the above-mentioned published choice studies providing an overview of the issues addressed, methods and findings. Methods Choice studies relating to nephrology were identified using electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsychINFO and Econlit from 1990 to 2015. For inclusion in the review, studies had to primarily relate to kidney disease and include results from statistical (econometric) analyses of respondents' choice or preference. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were assessed against a range of systematic review criteria, and methods and results summarized. Results We identified 14 eligible studies from Europe, Australasia, North America and Asia, reporting preferences for treatment or screening, patient experiences, quality of life (QOL), health outcomes and priority-setting frameworks. Specific contexts included medical interventions in kidney transplantation and renal cell carcinoma, health policies for organ donation and allocation, dialysis modalities and end-of-life care, using a variety of statistical models. The characteristics of time' (i.e.Transplant waiting time, dialysis hours, transport time) and QOL (pre-and post-Transplant, or pre-and post-dialysis) consistently influenced patient and clinician preferences across the choice studies. Conclusions DCE are increasingly used to obtain information about key preferences in kidney transplantation and dialysis. These study methods provide quantitative information about respondents' trade-offs between conflicting clinical and policy objectives, and can establish how preferences vary among stakeholder groups.

KW - dialysis

KW - discrete choice experiment

KW - kidney disease

KW - patient preferences

KW - transplantation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041642702&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/ndt/gfw436

DO - 10.1093/ndt/gfw436

M3 - Review article

VL - 33

SP - 348

EP - 355

JO - Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

JF - Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

SN - 0931-0509

IS - 2

ER -