Understanding HIV-positive patients' preferences for healthcare services: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment

Attribute Development in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Methods and Techniques to Inform Quantitative Instruments

OBJECTIVES

This review sought to identify the qualitative methods and techniques that researchers have used in the past decade to develop attributes and inform health-related discrete choice experiments (DCEs) surveys from a patient perspective.

METHODS

The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for reporting systematic reviews. An adapted appraisal tool following guidelines for reporting qualitative research for quantitative instruments and criteria for attribute development in DCEs was applied for quality assessment and data extraction. A narrative approach was used to synthesize data. This examination included consideration of issues pertaining to sampling, data collection, data analysis, attribute list reduction, wording, methodological adaptations to capture patient preferences, and testing the pre-experimental design decisions of the DCE survey.

RESULTS

Of 8505 articles identified for abstract screening, 680 were included for full-text screening, 36 of which met the inclusion criteria. Practices to improve methodological robustness included pre-data collection materials to inform instruments, data collection methods specific for decision-making scenarios, purposeful selection of data analysis methods to address the research question, and participants' involvement in reducing the list of attributes. Examples of methodological adaptations for patients were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

DCEs have the potential to become a mixed-method approach in which the qualitative phase informs a reduced list of attributes for a survey, serves the predesign decisions of the experiment by testing trade-offs, overlapping, understandability, face, and content validity and provides explanations of the quantitative results. Establishing guidelines for using qualitative methods for DCE attribute development may help to broadly enhance the methodological robustness of DCEs.

Toward understanding the impact of mHealth features for people with HIV: a latent class analysis of PositiveLinks usage

PositiveLinks (PL) is a multi-feature smartphone-based platform to improve engagement-in-care and viral suppression (VS) among clinic patients living with HIV. Features include medication reminders, mood/stress check-ins, a community board, and secure provider messaging. Our goal was to examine how PL users interact with the app and determine whether usage patterns correlate with clinical outcomes. Patients (N = 83) at a university-based Ryan White clinic enrolled in PL from June 2016 to March 2017 and were followed for up to 12 months. A subset (N = 49) completed interviews after 3 weeks of enrollment to explore their experiences with and opinions of PL. We differentiated PL members based on 6-month usage of app features using latent class analysis. We explored characteristics associated with class membership, compared reported needs and preferences by class, and examined association between class and VS. The sample of 83 PL members fell into four classes. "Maximizers" used all app features frequently (27%); "Check-in Users" tended to interact only with daily queries (22%); "Moderate All-Feature Users" used all features occasionally (33%); and "As-Needed Communicators" interacted with the app minimally (19%). VS improved or remained high among all classes after 6 months. VS remained high at 12 months among Maximizers (baseline and 12-month VS: 100%, 94%), Check-in Users (82%, 100%), and Moderate All-Feature Users (73%, 94%) but not among As-Needed Communicators (69%, 60%). This mixed-methods study identified four classes based on PL usage patterns that were distinct in characteristics and clinical outcomes. Identifying and characterizing mHealth user classes offers opportunities to tailor interventions appropriately based on patient needs and preferences as well as to provide targeted alternative support to achieve clinical goals.

Respondent Understanding in Discrete Choice Experiments: A Scoping Review

Introduction

Despite the recognised importance of participant understanding for valid and reliable discrete choice experiment (DCE) results, there has been limited assessment of whether, and how, people understand DCEs, and how ‘understanding’ is conceptualised in DCEs applied to a health context.

Objectives

Our aim was to identify how participant understanding is conceptualised in the DCE literature in a health context. Our research questions addressed how participant understanding is defined, measured, and used.

Methods

Searches were conducted (June 2019) in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO and Econlit databases, as well as hand searching. Search terms were based on previous DCE systematic reviews, with additional understanding keywords used in a proximity-based search strategy. Eligible studies were peer-reviewed journal articles in the field of health, related to DCE or best-worst scaling type 3 (BWS3) studies, and reporting some consideration or assessment of participant understanding. A descriptive analytical approach was used to chart relevant data from each study, including publication year, country, clinical area, subject group, sample size, study design, numbers of attributes, levels and choice sets, definition of understanding, how understanding was tested, results of the understanding tests, and how the information about understanding was used. Each study was categorised based on how understanding was conceptualised and used within the study.

Results

Of 306 potentially eligible articles identified, 31 were excluded based on titles and abstracts, and 200 were excluded on full-text review, resulting in 75 included studies. Three categories of study were identified: applied DCEs (n = 52), pretesting studies (n = 7) and studies of understanding (n = 16). Typically, understanding was defined in relation to either the choice context, such as attribute terminology, or the concept of choosing. Very few studies considered respondents’ engagement as a component of understanding. Understanding was measured primarily through qualitative pretesting, rationality or validity tests included in the survey, and participant self-report, however reporting and use of the results of these methods was inconsistent.

Conclusions

Those conducting or using health DCEs should carefully select, justify, and report the measurement and potential impact of participant understanding in their specific choice context. There remains scope for research into the different components of participant understanding, particularly related to engagement, the impact of participant understanding on DCE validity and reliability, the best measures of understanding, and methods to maximise participant understanding.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s40271-020-00467-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A discrete choice experiment to assess people living with HIV's (PLWHIV's) preferences for GP or HIV clinic appointments

OBJECTIVES

To understand which aspects of general practitioner (GP) and HIV clinic appointments people living with HIV (PLWHIV) most value when seeking advice for new health problems.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment using a convenience sample of people diagnosed with HIV. Participants were recruited from 14 general HIV clinics in the South East of England between December 2014 and April 2015. ORs were calculated using conditional logit (CLOGIT) and latent class models (LCMs).

RESULTS

A total of 1106 questionnaires were returned. Most participants were male (85%), white (74%) and were men who have sex with men (69%). The CLOGIT analysis showed people particularly valued shorter appointment waiting times (ORs between 1.52 and 3.62, p<0.001 in all instances). The LCM analysis showed there were two distinct classes, with 59% and 41% of respondents likely to be in each. The first class generally preferred GP to HIV clinic appointments and particularly valued 'being seen quickly'. For example, they had strong preferences for shorter appointment waiting times and longer GP opening hours. People in the second class also valued shorter waiting times, but they had a strong general preference for HIV clinic rather than GP appointments.

CONCLUSIONS

PLWHIV value many aspects of care for new health problems, particularly short appointment waiting times. However, they appear split in their general willingness to engage with GPs.