Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews

Abstract Background Time-saving formats of evidence syntheses have been developed to fulfill healthcare policymakers’ demands for timely evidence-based information. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) with decision-makers and people involved in the preparation of evidence syntheses was undertaken to...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Christian Speckemeier, Laura Krabbe, Susanne Schwenke, Jürgen Wasem, Barbara Buchberger, Silke Neusser
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2021-04-01
Series:Systematic Reviews
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01647-z
id doaj-be33dd3173354768bccd759a9b38ad11
record_format Article
spelling doaj-be33dd3173354768bccd759a9b38ad112021-04-25T11:09:49ZengBMCSystematic Reviews2046-40532021-04-011011810.1186/s13643-021-01647-zDiscrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviewsChristian Speckemeier0Laura Krabbe1Susanne Schwenke2Jürgen Wasem3Barbara Buchberger4Silke Neusser5Institute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-EssenInstitute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-EssenScossisInstitute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-EssenRobert Koch InstituteInstitute for Healthcare Management and Research, University of Duisburg-EssenAbstract Background Time-saving formats of evidence syntheses have been developed to fulfill healthcare policymakers’ demands for timely evidence-based information. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) with decision-makers and people involved in the preparation of evidence syntheses was undertaken to elicit preferences for methodological shortcuts in the conduct of abbreviated reviews. Methods D-efficient scenarios, each containing 14 pairwise comparisons, were designed for the DCE: the development of an evidence synthesis in 20 working days (scenario 1) and 12 months (scenario 2), respectively. Six attributes (number of databases, number of reviewers during screening, publication period, number of reviewers during data extraction, full-text analysis, types of HTA domains) with 2 to 3 levels each were defined. These were presented to the target population in an online survey. The relative importance of the individual attributes was determined using logistic regression models. Results Scenario 1 was completed by 36 participants and scenario 2 by 26 participants. The linearity assumption was confirmed by the full model. In both scenarios, the linear difference model showed a preference for higher levels for “number of reviewers during data extraction”, followed by “number of reviewers during screening” and “full-text analysis”. Subgroup analyses showed that preferences were influenced by participation in the preparation of evidence syntheses. Conclusion The surveyed persons expressed preferences for quality standards in the process of literature screening and data extraction.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01647-zEvidence synthesisRapid reviewPreferenceDiscrete choice experimentConjoint analysis
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Christian Speckemeier
Laura Krabbe
Susanne Schwenke
Jürgen Wasem
Barbara Buchberger
Silke Neusser
spellingShingle Christian Speckemeier
Laura Krabbe
Susanne Schwenke
Jürgen Wasem
Barbara Buchberger
Silke Neusser
Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews
Systematic Reviews
Evidence synthesis
Rapid review
Preference
Discrete choice experiment
Conjoint analysis
author_facet Christian Speckemeier
Laura Krabbe
Susanne Schwenke
Jürgen Wasem
Barbara Buchberger
Silke Neusser
author_sort Christian Speckemeier
title Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews
title_short Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews
title_full Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews
title_fullStr Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews
title_full_unstemmed Discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews
title_sort discrete choice experiment to determine preferences of decision-makers in healthcare for different formats of rapid reviews
publisher BMC
series Systematic Reviews
issn 2046-4053
publishDate 2021-04-01
description Abstract Background Time-saving formats of evidence syntheses have been developed to fulfill healthcare policymakers’ demands for timely evidence-based information. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) with decision-makers and people involved in the preparation of evidence syntheses was undertaken to elicit preferences for methodological shortcuts in the conduct of abbreviated reviews. Methods D-efficient scenarios, each containing 14 pairwise comparisons, were designed for the DCE: the development of an evidence synthesis in 20 working days (scenario 1) and 12 months (scenario 2), respectively. Six attributes (number of databases, number of reviewers during screening, publication period, number of reviewers during data extraction, full-text analysis, types of HTA domains) with 2 to 3 levels each were defined. These were presented to the target population in an online survey. The relative importance of the individual attributes was determined using logistic regression models. Results Scenario 1 was completed by 36 participants and scenario 2 by 26 participants. The linearity assumption was confirmed by the full model. In both scenarios, the linear difference model showed a preference for higher levels for “number of reviewers during data extraction”, followed by “number of reviewers during screening” and “full-text analysis”. Subgroup analyses showed that preferences were influenced by participation in the preparation of evidence syntheses. Conclusion The surveyed persons expressed preferences for quality standards in the process of literature screening and data extraction.
topic Evidence synthesis
Rapid review
Preference
Discrete choice experiment
Conjoint analysis
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01647-z
work_keys_str_mv AT christianspeckemeier discretechoiceexperimenttodeterminepreferencesofdecisionmakersinhealthcarefordifferentformatsofrapidreviews
AT laurakrabbe discretechoiceexperimenttodeterminepreferencesofdecisionmakersinhealthcarefordifferentformatsofrapidreviews
AT susanneschwenke discretechoiceexperimenttodeterminepreferencesofdecisionmakersinhealthcarefordifferentformatsofrapidreviews
AT jurgenwasem discretechoiceexperimenttodeterminepreferencesofdecisionmakersinhealthcarefordifferentformatsofrapidreviews
AT barbarabuchberger discretechoiceexperimenttodeterminepreferencesofdecisionmakersinhealthcarefordifferentformatsofrapidreviews
AT silkeneusser discretechoiceexperimenttodeterminepreferencesofdecisionmakersinhealthcarefordifferentformatsofrapidreviews
_version_ 1721510044810346496