Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLancsar, E
dc.contributor.authorRide, J
dc.contributor.authorDorner, Z
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-03T03:14:11Z
dc.date.available2021-02-03T03:14:11Z
dc.date.issued2020-02-01
dc.identifier.citationLancsar, E., Ride, J. & Dorner, Z. (2020). Does Combining Data from the Laboratory with a DCE Improve Our Understanding of Decision-Making?. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 13, (1), pp.141-141. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-019-00398-3.
dc.identifier.issn1178-1653
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/258908
dc.descriptionConference abstract
dc.description.abstractBackground: There is growing interest in the possibilities offered by experimental economics to improve methods used in health economics. Here we study the application of methods from the experimental economics laboratory to health-related discrete choice experiments (DCEs). The hypothesis is that we can improve our understanding of participants’ preferences by estimating novel, more comprehensive, preference models, now accounting for or making fewer assumptions about factors usually not captured in a DCE. Methods: The setting for this study is a DCE examining preferences for programs designed to improve nutrition and/or physical activity. These lifestyle choices are highly relevant to the pervasive problem of obesity, and carry significant health impacts. The DCE examines preferences for type of program, cost, program goals, and financial incentives for achievement of weight loss goals. We use laboratory methods to measure respondents’ time preferences, intrinsic motivation, and physical stature, incorporating each into the preference model. Using mixed logit estimation we compared a model with attributes and covariates to the same model with the addition of the variables from the laboratory. We test whether harnessing additional variables from the laboratory has any significant effect on our estimates of preference by examining the impact on model coefficients and on willingness-to-pay for program attributes. Results and conclusions: Measures of time preference and physical stature are statistically significant explanatory variables in our model. Adding these to the model did not change preferences in relation to the attributes of the nutrition and exercise programs nor other covariates, improved the statistical properties of the models (AIC and BIC) and impacted the estimated willingness-to-pay for program attributes. We discuss policy insights, implications for DCE practice and methodological questions raised by these findings.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.source11TH MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL ACADEMY OF HEALTH PREFERENCE RESEARCH
dc.titleDoes Combining Data from the Laboratory with a DCE Improve Our Understanding of Decision-Making?
dc.typeConference Paper
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s40271-019-00398-3
melbourne.affiliation.departmentMelbourne School of Population and Global Health
melbourne.source.titleThe Patient: Patient Centered Outcomes Research
melbourne.source.volume13
melbourne.source.issue1
melbourne.source.pages141-141
melbourne.elementsid1439615
melbourne.openaccess.urlhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s40271-019-00398-3.pdf
melbourne.contributor.authorRide, Jemimah
dc.identifier.eissn1178-1661
melbourne.event.locationNew Zealand
melbourne.accessrightsAccess this item via the Open Access location


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record