Feasibility of using modified adaptive conjoint analysis importance questions

Patient

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 209-215

  Fraenkel, Liana ^a,b  

^a VA CONNECTICUT HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

conjoint analysis; joint disorders, treatment

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE CONJOINT ANALYSIS; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ETHNICITY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HEALTH STATUS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; JOINT PROSTHESIS; KNEE PAIN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PILOT STUDY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICS; STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE;

EID: 77956544243     PISSN: 11781653     EISSN: 11781661     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/11318820-000000000-00000     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Ryan M, McIntosh E, Shackley P. Methodological issues in the application of conjoint analysis in health care. Health Econ 1998; 7: 373-8
2. Ryan M, Scott DA, Reeves C, et al. Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques. Health Technol Assess 2001; 5: 1-186
3. The ACA/Web v6.0 technical paper [online]. Available from URL: http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/tech pap/acatech.pdf [Accessed 2009 Jun 1]
4. King C, Hill A, Orme B. The importance question in ACA: can it be omitted? [online]. Available from URL: http:// www.sawtoothsoftware.com/ download/techpap/omitimp.pdf [Accessed 2009 Jun 1]
5. Allenby GM, Rossi PE. Perspectives based on 10 years of HB in marketing research [online]. Available from URL: http:// www.sawtoothsoftware.com/ download/techpap/allenby.pdf [Accessed 2009 Jun 1]
6. Janis IL,Mann L. Decision making: a psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment.NewYork: Free Press, 1985
7. Fraenkel L, Chodkowski D, Lim J, et al. Patients preferences for treatment of hepatitis C. Med Decis Making 2010 Jan- Feb; 30 (1): 45-57