Abstract
Conventional economic evaluation methods are likely unsuitable for valuing end-of-life care. This chapter describes much simpler tasks called discrete choice experiments as an alternative. It uses an Australian study and summarises work on the research frontier which offers the prospect of validating the stated preferences of individuals using physiological (response time) data. Such data also appear to be able to distinguish Kahneman’s “fast” (emotional) and “slow” (considered) decision-making styles, which will provide clinicians and policymakers with much more information about what is driving an individual’s views.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Singer PA, Martin DK, Kelner M (1999) Quality end-of-life care: patients’ perspectives. JAMA: J Am Med Assoc 281(2):163–168
Hales S, Zimmerman C, Rodin G (2008) The quality of dying and death. Arch Intern Med 168(9):912–918
Steinhauser KE, Clipp E, McNeilly M, Christakis NA, McIntyre LM, Tulsky JA (2000) In search of a good death: observations of patients, families, and providers. Ann Intern Med 132(10):825–832
Hirai K, Miyashita M, Morita T, Sanjo M, Uchitomi Y (2006) Good death in Japanese cancer care: a qualitative study. J Pain Symptom Manage 31(2):140–147
CIC GSFC (2013) Thinking ahead – GSF advance care planning discussion. Retrieved from thinking ahead – the gold standards framework advance care planning discussion. Website: http://www.goldstandardsframework.org.uk/cd-content/uploads/files/Library%2C%20Tools%20%26%20resources/ACP%20General%20July%202013.v21.pdf
Dodson JA, Fried TR, Van Ness PH, Goldstein NE, Lampert R (2013) Patient preferences for deactivation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. JAMA Intern Med 173(5):377–379. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1883
Beattie JM, Flynn TN, Clark AM (2013) Patient preferences for deactivation of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a response. JAMA Intern Med 173(16):1556–1557
Louviere JJ, Hensher DA (1982) On the design and analysis of simulated choice or allocation experiments in travel choice modelling. Transp Res Rec 890:11–17
Propper C (1990) Contingent valuation of time spent on NHS waiting lists. Econ J 100:193–199
Thurstone LL (1927) A law of comparative judgment. Psychol Rev 34:273–286
Louviere JJ (2001) What if consumer experiments impact variances as well as means: response variability as a behavioural phenomenon. J Consum Res 28(3):506–511
Kass-Bartelmes BL, Hughes R, Rutherford MK (2003). Advance care planning: preferences for care at the end of life. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 12: AHRQ Pub No. 03-0018, pp.1–20
Rose JM, Bliemer MCJ (2009) Constructing efficient stated choice experimental designs. Transp Rev 29(5):587–617
Street DJ, Burgess L (2007) The construction of optimal stated choice experiments: theory and methods. Wiley, Hoboken
Flynn TN (2010) Valuing citizen and patient preferences in health: recent developments in three types of best-worst scaling. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 10(3):259–267
Flynn TN, Huynh E, Corke C (2015) Attitudes towards end-of-life care. In: Louviere JJ, Flynn TN, Marley AAJ (eds) Best-worst scaling: theory, methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York
Hawkins GE, Marley AAJ, Heathcote A, Flynn TN, Louviere JJ, Brown SD (2014) The best of times and the worst of times are interchangeable. Decision 1(3):192–214
Hawkins GE, Marley AAJ, Heathcote A, Flynn TN, Louviere JJ, Brown SD (2014) Integrating cognitive process and descriptive models of attitudes and preferences. Cognit Sci 38(4):701–735
Green PE, Rao VR (1971) Conjoint measurement for quantifying judgmental data. J Mark Res 8:355–363
Louviere JJ, Flynn TN, Carson RT (2010) Discrete choice experiments are not conjoint analysis. J Choice Model 3(3):57–72
Baker R, Thompson C, Mannion R (2006) Q methodology in health economics. J Health Serv Res Policy 11(1):38–45
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Flynn, T.N., Corke, C., Huynh, E. (2016). Preference Elicitation at the End of Life. In: Round, J. (eds) Care at the End of Life. Adis, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28267-1_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28267-1_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Adis, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-28266-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-28267-1
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)