The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity
Open accessAbstract
Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are economic tools that elicit the stated preferences of respondents. Because of their increasing importance in informing the design of health products and services, it is critical to understand the extent to which DCEs give reliable predictions outside of the experimental context. We systematically reviewed the literature of published DCE studies comparing predictions to choices made in reality; we extracted individual-level data to estimate a bivariate mixed-effects model of pooled sensitivity and specificity. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and six of these gave sufficient data for inclusion in a meta-analysis. Pooled sensitivity and specificity estimates were 88% (95% CI 81, 92%) and 34% (95% CI 23, 46%), respectively, and the area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.60 (95% CI 0.55, 0.64). Results indicate that DCEs can produce reasonable predictions of health-related behaviors. There is a great need for future research on the external validity of DCEs, particularly empirical studies assessing predicted and revealed preferences of a representative sample of participants.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 · Cited by 28,164
Wang, G., Ma, R., Qiao, G., Wada, K., Aizawa, Y., & Satoh, T. (2015) · Integrative Medicine International · doi:10.1159/000368408 · Cited by 18,657
Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior
McFadden, D. L. (1972) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 14,203
Cragg, J. G., & Zarembka, P. (1975) · The Canadian Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/134075 · Cited by 8,342
Cited by
Factors Associated With US Adults’ Likelihood of Accepting COVID-19 Vaccination
Kreps, S., Prasad, S., Brownstein, J. S., Hswen, Y., Garibaldi, B. T., Zhang, B., & Kriner, D. L. (2020) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.25594 · Cited by 732
Szinay, D., Cameron, R., Naughton, F., Whitty, J. A., Brown, J., & Jones, A. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/32365 · Cited by 106
Williams, G., & Kinchin, I. (2023) · The European Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1007/s10198-022-01528-9 · Cited by 16
Reed, S. D., Sutphin, J., Gonzalez, J. M., Wallace, M. J., Stephenson, J. J., Electricwala, B., Bosworth, H. B., & Pagidipati, N. (2025) · Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.124.011804 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Quaife, M., Terris-Prestholt, F., Di Tanna, G. L., & Vickerman, P.
- Venue
- The European Journal of Health Economics
- Published
- 2018-01-29
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1053-1066
- ISSN
- 1439-3972 (ISSN-L)
- 1618-7598
- 1618-7601
- OpenAlex
- W2792844427
- Cited by
- 371
- References
- 63
- FWCI
- 8.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s10198-018-0954-6
- The paper
- Quaife, M., Terris-Prestholt, F., Di Tanna, G. L., & Vickerman, P. (2018). How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity. The European Journal of Health Economics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-018-0954-6
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
