Cited by 16Economic and Environmental ValuationHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

The application of discrete choice experiments eliciting young peoples’ preferences for healthcare: a systematic literature review

Open access
Williams, Galina, Kinchin, Irina·2023·The European Journal of Health Economics

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Understanding young people's preferences for healthcare is critical for reducing the negative effect of undesirable choices. This review aims to synthesise the evidence obtained from discrete choice experiments (DCEs) eliciting young people's preferences for healthcare interventions and service deliveries, specifically, to (1) examine the methodology, including a selection of attributes and levels, experimental design, estimation procedure and validity; (2) evaluate similarities, differences and rigour of designs to the general population DCEs; and, (3) compare the DCEs' application to the seven health priority areas defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO). METHODS: A systematic review searching Medline, EconLIT, PsychINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed up until May 2021. INCLUSION CRITERIA: a DCE, eliciting young peoples' preferences (10-24 years of age), on a healthcare-related topic defined by WHO, peer-reviewed, full-text available in English. A bespoke checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. RESULTS: Eighteen DCE studies were included in the review, exploring interventions and service in sexual and reproductive health (n = 9; 50%), smoking cessation (n = 4; 22%), mental health (n = 1), nutrition (n = 1), unintentional injuries (n = 1), vaccination against severe but rare diseases (n = 1); and diabetes (n = 1). Compared to the general population, DCEs eliciting young people's preferences had a high proportion of monetary measures and a smaller number of choices per respondent with the overwhelming number of surveys using fractional factorial design. The majority of studies were of moderate quality (50-75% of the criteria met). CONCLUSIONS: While identified DCEs touched on most health priority areas, the scope was limited. The conduct and reporting of DCEs with young people could be improved by including the state-of-the-art design, estimation procedures and analysis.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10198-022-01528-9

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [3]Louviere, J., D. Hensher, and J. Swait, Stated Choice Models — Analysis and Application. 2000, Cambridge. U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
  2. [5]NRC, Committee on Improving the Health, Safety, and Well-Being of Young Adults, ed. S.C. Bonnie RJ, Breiner H, editors. 2015, Washington, DC: Board on Children, Youth, and Families; Institute of Medicine (IoM); National Research Council (NRC), National Academies Press. 25855847

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Williams, G., & Kinchin, I.
Affiliations
  • Central Queensland University (AU)
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
Corresponding author
Williams, Galina
Venue
The European Journal of Health Economics
Published
2022-09-28
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
987-998
ISSN
  • 1439-3972 (ISSN-L)
  • 1618-7598
  • 1618-7601
OpenAlex
W4297489305
Cited by
16
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1
FWCI
0.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The European Journal of Health Economics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (acceptedVersion)
  • OPUS - Open Publications of UTS Scholars (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Central Queensland University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
discrete choice experiment, youth, health preferences, health interventions, health care delivery, sexual and reproductive health, smoking cessation, mental health, nutrition, unintentional injuries, diabetes mellitus, methodological quality, fractional factorial design, monetary valuation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Choice Behavior, Delivery of Health Care, Humans, Mental Health, Research Design, Rare Diseases, Checklist, Patient Preference

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