Improvements to Survey Design from Pilot Testing a Discrete-Choice Experiment of the Preferences of Persons Living with HIV for Long-Acting Antiretroviral Therapies.


Journal

The patient
ISSN: 1178-1661
Titre abrégé: Patient
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101309314

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2022
Historique:
accepted: 10 04 2022
pubmed: 21 5 2022
medline: 13 8 2022
entrez: 20 5 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Development of clear and effective discrete-choice experiment surveys is an important step toward ensuring accurate and usable preference results. Pretest interviews and pilot testing are common in the development of discrete-choice experiments, and it is important for researchers to report details of survey changes resulting from patient feedback elicited in pilot work. This paper details pilot testing of an online discrete-choice experiment to elicit preferences for long-acting antiretroviral therapies among patients with HIV. The survey included an introduction to hypothetical treatment options, descriptions of attributes, comprehension questions, instructions for completing a discrete-choice experiment, a discrete-choice experiment with 17 choice tasks, and questions about personal characteristics. We piloted the survey with 50 respondents over ten waves. Each wave incorporated design improvements based on observations made during the previous wave. Respondents completed the online survey while screen sharing with a researcher, allowing interactive discussion. We developed a scheme for assessing and categorizing the survey changes. Changes to the pilot were categorized by ways they impacted aspects of the discrete-choice experiment or the likely quality of resulting data. The four categories of impact are: understanding of attributes, underlying discrete-choice experiment and understanding of the choice question, collection of individual characteristics hypothesized to affect preference, and changes that improved clarity and usability of the survey without directly affecting the other categories (e.g., survey navigation and instructional clarity, formatting changes). Detailed attention to the respondent experience in this large pilot allowed survey improvements that will likely reduce ambiguity, ensure more accurate capture of patient preferences and, ultimately, improve product development for long-acting antiretroviral therapies.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Development of clear and effective discrete-choice experiment surveys is an important step toward ensuring accurate and usable preference results. Pretest interviews and pilot testing are common in the development of discrete-choice experiments, and it is important for researchers to report details of survey changes resulting from patient feedback elicited in pilot work. This paper details pilot testing of an online discrete-choice experiment to elicit preferences for long-acting antiretroviral therapies among patients with HIV.
METHODS
The survey included an introduction to hypothetical treatment options, descriptions of attributes, comprehension questions, instructions for completing a discrete-choice experiment, a discrete-choice experiment with 17 choice tasks, and questions about personal characteristics. We piloted the survey with 50 respondents over ten waves. Each wave incorporated design improvements based on observations made during the previous wave. Respondents completed the online survey while screen sharing with a researcher, allowing interactive discussion. We developed a scheme for assessing and categorizing the survey changes.
RESULTS
Changes to the pilot were categorized by ways they impacted aspects of the discrete-choice experiment or the likely quality of resulting data. The four categories of impact are: understanding of attributes, underlying discrete-choice experiment and understanding of the choice question, collection of individual characteristics hypothesized to affect preference, and changes that improved clarity and usability of the survey without directly affecting the other categories (e.g., survey navigation and instructional clarity, formatting changes).
CONCLUSIONS
Detailed attention to the respondent experience in this large pilot allowed survey improvements that will likely reduce ambiguity, ensure more accurate capture of patient preferences and, ultimately, improve product development for long-acting antiretroviral therapies.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35595961
doi: 10.1007/s40271-022-00581-z
pii: 10.1007/s40271-022-00581-z
pmc: PMC9123156
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

513-520

Subventions

Organisme : NIAID NIH HHS
ID : P30 AI027757
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : P30 MH123248
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : R01 MH121424
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Références

N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 19;382(12):1124-1135
pubmed: 32130806
Value Health. 2011 Jun;14(4):403-13
pubmed: 21669364
Patient. 2020 Feb;13(1):121-136
pubmed: 31840215
Value Health. 2013 Jan-Feb;16(1):3-13
pubmed: 23337210
SAGE Open Med. 2018 Dec 04;6:2050312118816919
pubmed: 30574301
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017 May 30;15(1):115
pubmed: 28558805
AIDS Res Ther. 2020 Apr 1;17(1):12
pubmed: 32238169
Lancet HIV. 2018 Jun;5(6):e269-e270
pubmed: 29893238
Pharmacoeconomics. 2019 Feb;37(2):201-226
pubmed: 30392040
N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 19;382(12):1112-1123
pubmed: 32130809
AIDS Res Ther. 2022 Feb 25;19(1):13
pubmed: 35216610
AIDS Care. 2009 Jan;21(1):87-93
pubmed: 19085224

Auteurs

Douglas Barthold (D)

The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. barthold@uw.edu.

Aaron T Brah (AT)

Division of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Susan M Graham (SM)

Division of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Jane M Simoni (JM)

Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Department of Psychology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Brett Hauber (B)

The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Pfizer, Inc., New York, NY, USA.

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