Articlehybrid2013

Binary Choice Health State Valuation and Mode of Administration: Head-to-Head Comparison of Online and CAPI

Brendan James Mulhern · Louise Longworth · John Edward Brazier · Donna Rowen · Nick J Bansback · Nancy J. Devlin +1 more

71 citations0/0 files storedValue in Health

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life Survey Methodology and Nonresponse Economic and Environmental Valuation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health state valuation exercises can be conducted online, but the quality of data generated is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether responses to binary choice health state valuation questions differ by administration mode: online versus face to face. METHODS: Identical surveys including demographic, self-reported health status, and seven types of binary choice valuation questions were administered in online and computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) settings. Samples were recruited following procedures employed in typical online or CAPI studies. Analysis included descriptive comparisons of the distribution of responses across the binary options and probit regression to explain the propensity to choose one option across modes of administration, controlling for background characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, 422 (221 online; 201 CAPI) respondents completed a survey. There were no overall age or sex differences. Online respondents were educated to a higher level than were the CAPI sample and general population, and employment status differed. CAPI respondents reported significantly better general health and health/life satisfaction. CAPI took significantly longer to complete. There was no effect of the mode of administration on responses to the valuation questions, and this was replicated when demographic differences were controlled. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that both modes may be equally valid for health state valuation studies using binary choice methods (e.g., discrete choice experiments). There are some differences between the observable characteristics of the samples, and the groups may differ further in terms of unobservable characteristics. When designing health state valuation studies, the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches must be considered.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 71 citations exist upstream.

References

2011Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L)1997Modeling Valuations for EuroQol Health States 2002The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36 1984Two-component models of socially desirable responding.2012Interim Scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: Mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L Value Sets 2005Mode of questionnaire administration can have serious effects on data quality 2004The Estimation of a Preference-Based Measure of Health From the SF-12 1997World-Wide Web survey research: Benefits, potential problems, and solutions

Cited by

2014Testing a discrete choice experiment including duration to value health states for large descriptive systems: Addressing design and sampling issues

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.