PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10082145

Response-ordering effects: a methodological issue in conjoint analysis.

S Farrar·M Ryan
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Conjoint analysis is a technique relatively new to the evaluation of health care services in the UK. The technique uses data generated from questionnaires. This paper addresses the issue of response-ordering effects that may result from the ordering of dimensions of benefit within a question. Two questionnaires were given to 216 hospital consultants as part of a priority setting exercise. These were identical other than the ordering of the dimensions within each question. The regression analysis was segmented according to questionnaire type and the coefficients of the segmentation were tested for statistically significant differences. The results show no evidence of ordering effects.

Explore related subjects

Health Services ResearchHumansLikelihood FunctionsLogistic ModelsPsychometricsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited KingdomJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S Farrar, M Ryan. 1999. Response-ordering effects: a methodological issue in conjoint analysis.. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1050(199902)8%3A1%3C75%3A%3Aaid-hec400%3E3.0.co%3B2-5

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

Local opinion leaders: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Both the theory of diffusion of innovations and the social influences model of behaviour change suggest that using local opinion leaders to transmit norms and model appropriate behaviour may improve health professional practice. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects using local opinion leaders on the practice of health professionals or patient outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE to May 1998, the Research and Development Resource Base in Continuing Medical Education, and reference lists of related systematic reviews and articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of the use of local opinion leaders (defined as health professionals nominated by their colleagues as being educationally influential). The participants were health care professionals responsible for patient care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies were included involving more than 296 health professionals. A variety of patient problems were targeted, including acute myocardial infarction, cancer pain, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic lung disease, vaginal birth after caesarean section, labour and delivery, and urinary catheter care. Six of seven trials that measured health professional practice demonstrated some improvement for at least one outcome variable, and in two trials, the results were statistically significant and clinically important. In three trials that measured patient outcomes, only one achieved an impact upon practice that was of practical importance: local opinion leaders were effective in improving the rate of vaginal birth after previous caesarean section. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Using local opinion leaders results in mixed effects on professional practice. However, it is not always clear what local opinion leaders do and replicable descriptions are needed. Further research is required to determine if opinion leaders can be identified and in which circumstances they are likely to influence the practice of their peers.

Health Services Research↗
PubMed2000

Clinical science research.

Clinical science research incorporates the fields of clinical investigation and health services research. With a focus on the use of either human specimens or subjects, clinical investigation research projects translate knowledge gained from basic science research based on animal models for disease. The goal of clinical investigation is to develop new prevention, intervention, and therapeutic approaches to improve patient clinical outcomes. In contrast, health services research focuses on the improvement of the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and outcomes of care. Health services research projects examine options to improve the health care delivery system, organization, financing, and reimbursement mechanisms in place today. The purpose of this article is to review common terminology and methodologic approaches that are used in clinical science research. The process of designing a research project is reviewed. Beginning with the development of a research question and hypothesis, the steps for successful completion of the project are discussed. Different study design approaches are presented with their respective strengths and weaknesses. The challenges associated with conducting a clinical research study are discussed, including the development of an appropriate sampling strategy, the designing of data collection, instruments, and the assurance of study data integrity. Possible threats to study validity and generalizability are assessed.One the major advantages of clinical research is that it offers an opportunity to study clinical questions in the clinical setting without the expenses of a basic research laboratory and basic science technology. Thus important clinical questions related to patient care, new technology assessment, clinical practice management, health care administration, or health policy may be addressed.

Health Services Research↗