Survey modes comparison in contingent valuation: Internet panels and mail surveys.


Journal

Health economics
ISSN: 1099-1050
Titre abrégé: Health Econ
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9306780

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
02 2020
Historique:
received: 23 05 2019
revised: 16 09 2019
accepted: 19 11 2019
pubmed: 13 12 2019
medline: 19 5 2021
entrez: 13 12 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Stated preferences methods are extensively applied in health economics to elicit preferences. Although mailed surveys were commonly used to collect data, internet panel (IP) surveys are being increasingly used. This raises questions about the validity of responses and estimated willingness-to-pay (WTP) values generated from IP surveys. We conduct the first study in health to compare a contingent valuation IP survey with a mailed survey using the electoral roll. Our IP has a higher response rate and lower item missing response rate. The difference is reduced but remains when restricting comparisons with valid WTPs. Sample characteristics differ, with significant differences between modes for gender, age, income, and attitudes and knowledge. Although difference in WTP values exist, with the IP resulting in higher values, we find limited evidence that such differences are statistically significant. The mail survey has lower initial cost per response; however, once restricting samples to valid WTP responses with nonmissing respondent information, the cost per response across modes is similar. Our results, suggesting that IPs generate valid and cost-effective values, are encouraging as researchers move increasingly to IPs to collect preference data.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31828891
doi: 10.1002/hec.3983
doi:

Substances chimiques

Illicit Drugs 0

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

234-242

Subventions

Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HERU1
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Références

Basu, A., Manning, W. G., & Mullahy, J. (2004). Comparing alternative models: Log vs Cox proportional hazard?Health Economics, 13, 749-765.
Determann, D., Lambooij, M. S., Steyerberg, E. W., deBekker-Grob, E. W., & deWit, G. A. (2017). Impact of survey administration mode on the results of a health-related discrete choice experiment: Online and paper comparison.Value in Health, 20, 953-960.
Dillman, D., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2009). Internet, mail and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. New Jersey: Wiley.
Duan, N., Manning, W. G., Morris, C. N., & Newhouse, J. P. (1983). A comparison of alternative models for the demand for medical care.Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 1, 115-126.
Hammitt, J. K., & Zhou, Y. (2006). The economic value of air-pollution-related health risks in China: A contingent valuation study.Environmental and Resource Economics, 33, 399-423.
Matheson, C., Jaffray, M., Ryan, M., Bond, C. M., Fraser, K., Kirk, M., & Liddell, D. (2014). Public opinion of drug treatment policy: Exploring the public's attitudes, knowledge, experience and willingness to pay for drug treatment strategies.The International Journal on Drug Policy, 25, 407-415.
Mulhern, B., Longworth, L., Brazier, J., Rowen, D., Bansback, N., Devlin, N., & Tsuchiya, A. (2013). Binary choice health state valuation and mode of administration: Head-to-head comparison of online and CAPI.Value in Health, 16, 104-113.
Norman, R., King, M. T., Clarke, D., Viney, R., Cronin, P., & Street, D. (2010). Does mode of administration matter? Comparison of online and face-to-face administration of a time trade-off task.Quality of Life Research, 19, 499-508.
Rowen, D., Brazier, J., Keetharuth, A., Tsuchiya, A., & Mukuria, C. (2016). Comparison of modes of administration and alternative formats for eliciting societal preferences for burden of illness.Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 14, 89-104.
Ryan, M., & San Miguel, F. (2000). Testing for consistency in willingness to pay experiments.Journal of Economic Psychology, 21, 305-317.
Watson, V., Porteous, T., Bolt, T., & Ryan, M. (2019) Mode and frame matter: Assessing the impact of survey mode and sample frame in choice experiments medical decision making (forthcoming).
Watson, V.. Porteous, T., & Ryan, M. (June 2013). Survey mode effects when eliciting public preferences for health care: A pilot discrete choice experiment study. Health Economists' Study Group. Warwick.
Yu, X., & Abler, D. (2010). Incorporating zero and missing responses into CVM with open-ended bidding: Willingness to pay for blue skies in Beijing.Environment and Development Economics, 15, 535-556.

Auteurs

Mandy Ryan (M)

Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Emmanouil Mentzakis (E)

Economics Department, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Catriona Matheson (C)

Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stirling, Striling, UK.

Christine Bond (C)

Centre of Academic Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH