UNASSIGNED: Discrete choice experiment (DCE) and profile case (case 2) best-worst scaling (BWS) present uncertainties regarding the acceptability of quantifying individual healthcare preferences, which may adversely affect the validity of responses and impede the reflection of true healthcare preferences. This study aimed to assess the acceptability of these two methods from the perspective of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and examine their association with specific characteristics of the target population.
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study was based on a nationally representative survey; data were collected using a multistage stratified cluster-sampling procedure between September 2021 and January 2022. Eligible adults with confirmed T2DM voluntarily participated in this study. Participants completed both the DCE and case 2 BWS (BWS-2) choice tasks in random order and provided self-reported assessments of acceptability, including task completion difficulty, comprehension of task complexity, and response preference. Logistic regression and random forest models were used to identify variables associated with acceptability.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 3286 patients with T2DM were included in the study. Respondents indicated there was no statistically significant difference in completion difficulty between the DCE and BWS-2, although the DCE scores were slightly higher (3.07 ± 0.68 vs 3.03 ± 0.67, P = 0.06). However, 1979 (60.2%) respondents found the DCE easier to comprehend. No significant preferences were observed between the two methods (1638 (49.8%) vs 1648 (50.2%)). Sociodemographic factors, such as residence, monthly out-of-pocket costs, and illness duration were significantly associated with comprehension complexity and response preference.
UNASSIGNED: This study yielded contrasting results to most of previous studies, suggesting that DCE may be less cognitively demanding and more suitable for patients with T2DM from the perspective of self-reported acceptability of DCE and BWS. This study promotes a focus on patient acceptability in quantifying individual healthcare preferences to inform tailored optimal stated-preference method for a target population.
Stated preference methodologies such as the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and case 2 best-worst scaling (BWS-2) are gaining popularity as methods for quantifying individual preferences in healthcare. However, the acceptability of the two methods to participants must be considered in practice to reduce cognitive burden and ensure the validity of preference elicitation.DCE was perceived to be less cognitively burdensome than BWS-2. In contrast to patients who thought that DCE was more acceptable, BWS-2 was more accepted by rural patients, patients who lived with the disease for a longer period, and those who had lower monthly out-of-pocket costs.These findings demonstrate potential differences in the acceptability of DCE and BWS-2 for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. To improve efficiency, it would be useful for researchers to consider the optimal stated preference method for identifying target populations according to sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics.

UNASSIGNED: Several treatment options are available for anemia associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD); however, there remains a lack of awareness of physician and patient preferences regarding these treatments. We aimed to explore physicians\' and patients\' perceptions and preferences regarding the management of anemia of CKD in Japan.
UNASSIGNED: A web-based survey, including best-worst scaling (BWS), was conducted with physicians who had treated ≥1 patient with anemia of CKD in the preceding year, and with patients with CKD who self-reported a clinical diagnosis of anemia of CKD or low hemoglobin levels. A three-step approach was used comprising cognitive interviews, a pilot survey, and a main survey. The BWS survey results were analyzed using multinomial logit and hierarchical Bayesian models.
UNASSIGNED: The survey was completed by 906 participants: 103 patients (average age 60.6 years; 77.7% male) and 803 physicians (166 nephrologists, 214 cardiologists, 137 diabetologists, and 286 general internists). Almost all (96.0%) physicians surveyed considered anemia of CKD to be an important condition to treat. Hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase (HIF-PH) inhibitors had the highest treatment satisfaction among physicians, whereas patients had the highest satisfaction with both erythropoietin-stimulating agent therapy and HIF-PH inhibitors. Approximately one-third (35.9%) of patients surveyed indicated that they were receiving treatment. When comparing the relative importance of attributes and levels, physicians favored efficacy (particularly improvement in hemoglobin levels), whereas patients favored safety (particularly a lower rate of severe adverse events).
UNASSIGNED: Although a majority of physicians consider treatment of CKD-related anemia important, differences in the perceptions and usage of medications exist between medical specialties. Preferences for the management of anemia of CKD vary between physicians and patients; therefore, patient involvement in treatment decisions may help optimize outcomes.

UNASSIGNED: The development of high-quality stated preference (SP) surveys requires a rigorous design process involving engagement with representatives from the target population. However, while transparency in the reporting of the development of SP surveys is encouraged, few studies report on this process and the outcomes. Recommended stages of instrument development includes both steps for stakeholder/end-user engagement and pretesting. Pretesting typically involves interviews, often across multiple waves, with improvements made at each wave; pretesting is therefore resource intensive. The aims of this paper are to report on the outcomes of collaboration with a Lewy body dementia research advisory group during the design phase of a SP survey. We also evaluate an alternative approach to instrument development, necessitated by a resource constrained context.
UNASSIGNED: The approach involved conducting the stages of end-user engagement and pretesting together during a public involvement event. A hybrid approach involving a focus group with breakout interviews was employed. Feedback from contributors informed the evolution of the survey instrument.
UNASSIGNED: Changes to the survey instrument were organized into four categories: attribute modifications; choice task presentation and understanding; information presentation, clarity and content; and best-best scaling presentation. The hybrid approach facilitated group brainstorming while still allowing the researcher to assess the feasibility of choice tasks in an interview setting. However, greater individual exploration and the opportunity to trial iterative improvements across waves was not feasible with this approach.
UNASSIGNED: Involvement of the research advisory group resulted in a more person-centered survey design. In a context constrained by time and budget, and with consideration of the capacity and vulnerability of the target population, the approach taken was a feasible and pragmatic mechanism for improving the design of a SP survey.

BACKGROUND: Listening to patient voices is critical, in terms of how people experience their condition as well as their treatment preferences. This research explored the patient journey, therapy attributes and goals among treatment experienced adults with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). We sought to understand patient experiences, needs and expectations to identify areas for improvement of treatment and care delivery.
METHODS: Two online surveys were developed for completion by CLL patients. In Stage 1, participants completed a best-worst scaling (BWS) task to evaluate eleven previously validated healthcare journey moments that matter (MTM). Responses were used to generate the patient experience index (PEI) score. In Stage 2, participants completed a survey that included both a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to assess drivers of treatment preferences by evaluating the relative attribute importance (RAI) of seven features and a BWS exercise which explored long-term treatment goals.
RESULTS: Twenty-five patients completed Stage 1 and thirty patients Stage 2. Treatment experience was balanced between oral and intravenous medication. The most important/least satisfied MTM were treatment effectiveness, access to support and other treatments as well as monitoring progress. The median PEI score was 66.2 (out of 100). DCE results demonstrated that patients most value treatments for CLL that are associated with prolonged progression free survival (PFS; RAI: 24.6%), followed by treatments that have a lower risk of severe side effects and lower out-of-pocket costs (RAI: 19.5%, 17.4%, respectively). The remainder of the weight in decision making (38.5%) was split between the remaining attributes, namely \'mild to moderate side effects\' (13.4%), \'long-term risks\' (12.2%), type of treatment (i.e., oral, IV or a combination of oral and IV; 8.7%) and treatment duration (i.e., ongoing versus fixed; 4.2%). Patients preferred oral to intravenous therapy. The most valued long-term treatment goal was to be physically healthy, followed by living a long life, spending time with family/friends, and avoiding hospitalization.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment experienced patients with CLL are focused on receiving effective, safe therapies and value long PFS. Consideration and discussion of other attributes, such as once daily dosing, oral only medication, out-of-pocket costs and access to support services may affect patient treatment choices and ultimately enhance their healthcare experience and outcomes.

Access to safe, affordable diets is paramount for improved nutritional outcomes. Yet, how do stakeholders perceive the binding constraints and requisite policy actions to increase food safety and affordability? Focusing on Nigeria, this paper uses best-worst scaling techniques applied to a survey of 200 government and agrifood system stakeholders to examine their policy beliefs on safety and affordability vis-à-vis the vegetable and fish value chains. We find that divergence among stakeholders is greater for food safety than affordability. While antibiotics overuse and toxin exposure, lack of knowledge, and weak legislation were identified by different stakeholders as the binding constraints for food safety, high costs of inputs and infrastructure, as well as security threats, were seen as common challenges for affordability across most, though not all, stakeholders for both value chains. Overall, the paper highlights the importance of beliefs in the agrifood system policymaking process and emphasizes the need to explore not only the existence but also the source of divergent beliefs among policy actors in greater depth.

UNASSIGNED: Unhealthy eating habits are costly and can lead to serious diseases such as obesity. Nutrition apps offer a promising approach to improving dietary behavior. Gamification elements (GEs) can motivate users to continue using nutrition apps by making them more enjoyable, which can lead to more positive behavioral changes regarding dietary choices. However, the effects of users\' preferences and individual characteristics on gamified systems are not yet understood. Current calls for research suggest that personalized gamified systems might lead to user satisfaction, continuous app use, and-ultimately-long-term improvements in diet.
UNASSIGNED: The aim was to determine the most preferred GEs in nutrition apps and to define clusters of GEs preferences in terms of personality and socio-demographic characteristics.
UNASSIGNED: We surveyed 308 people to measure their preferences regarding GEs in nutrition apps and applied best-worst scaling to determine the most preferred GEs. Furthermore, we used cluster analysis to identify different user clusters and described them in terms of personality and socio-demographic characteristics.
UNASSIGNED: We determine that GEs most favored are goals, progress bars, and coupons. We revealed three distinct user clusters in terms of personality and socio-demographic characteristics. Based on the individual factors of openness and self-perception, we find that significant differences exist between the preferences for leaderboards and coupons.
UNASSIGNED: We contribute by shedding light on differences and similarities in GE preferences relating to specific contexts and individual factors, revealing the potential for individualized nutrition apps. Our findings will benefit individuals, app designers, and public health institutions.

Enhancing the arsenal of methods available to shape implementation strategies and bolster knowledge translation is imperative. Stated preference methods, including discrete choice experiments (DCE) and best-worst scaling (BWS), rooted in economics, emerge as robust, theory-driven tools for understanding and influencing the behaviors of both recipients and providers of innovation. This commentary outlines the wide-ranging application of stated preference methods across the implementation continuum, ushering in effective knowledge translation. The prospects for utilizing these methods within implementation science encompass (1) refining and tailoring intervention and implementation strategies, (2) exploring the relative importance of implementation determinants, (3) identifying critical outcomes for key decision-makers, and 4) informing policy prioritization. Operationalizing findings from stated preference research holds the potential to precisely align health products and services with the requisites of patients, providers, communities, and policymakers, thereby realizing equitable impact.

UNASSIGNED: To determine the perspective of patients and professionals in Assisted Reproduction Units (ARU) on the importance of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) compared to other elective procedures, to highlight the relevance of ART as an elective procedure and the impact of delayed interventions on patients.
UNASSIGNED: An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, online survey-based study was conducted in infertility patients and partners (n=98) and ARU healthcare professionals (n=83). The survey included a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment and an ad-hoc questionnaire to analyze the pandemic impact on ART management and infertility patients in Spain. In the BWS, each respondent established priorities choosing which patient profile should be rated as the highest and lowest priority profile on a waiting list. To understand the importance that they give to assisted reproduction compared to other procedures, three very common elective procedures involving different patient profiles were selected: cataract surgery, knee arthroplasty, and varicose vein surgery. For each procedure, three hypothetical patient profiles corresponding to three different degrees of severity on a waiting list were designed.
UNASSIGNED: Patients attributed greater importance to ART profiles (BWS score: patients 0.14 vs professionals -0.05; p<0.01) whereas professionals prioritized cataract surgery (patients 0.06 vs professionals 0.23; p<0.01). Concerning the profile severity, more severe profiles were prioritized in all procedures by both groups. Patients\' and professionals\' perspectives on the impact of the pandemic were similar, with exceptions: information received for resuming ART; health care provision in crisis situations; and reduction of parenting options. The pandemic affected patients\' ability to conceive a child (70.4% of those surveyed), their psychological well-being (75.5%), and partner, social, and work relationships (69.4%).
UNASSIGNED: Preference studies involving patients and professionals can provide important information to define framework criteria for the management of waiting lists for elective procedures, and to prioritize interventions during pandemic periods. The pandemic impact on infertility patients highlights the relevance of developing measures and strategies to cope with similar future situations in the most appropriate way.

Smartphone apps have been beneficial in controlling and preventing the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is a gap in research surrounding the importance of smartphone app functions from a user\'s perspective. Although the insights and opinions of different stakeholders, such as policymakers and medical professionals, can influence the success of a public health policy, any strategy will face difficulty in achieving the expected effect if it is not based on a method that users can accept.
This study aimed to assess the importance of a hypothetical smartphone app\'s functions for managing health during a pandemic based on the perspective of user preferences.
A cross-sectional and web-based survey using the best-worst scaling (BWS) method was used to investigate the general population\'s preferences for important smartphone app functions. Participants were recruited from a professional surveying company\'s web-based surveying panel. The attributes of the BWS questionnaire were developed based on a robust process, including literature review, interviews, and expert discussion. A balanced incomplete block design was used to construct the choice task to ensure the effectiveness of the research design. Count analysis, conditional logit model analysis, and mixed logit analysis were used to estimate preference heterogeneity among respondents.
The responses of 2153 participants were eligible for analysis. Nearly 55% (1192/2153) were female, and the mean age was 31.4 years. Most participants (1765/2153, 81.9%) had completed tertiary or higher education, and approximately 70% (1523/2153) were urban residents. The 3 most vital functions according to their selection were \"surveillance and monitoring of infected cases,\" \"quick self-screening,\" and \"early detection of infected cases.\" The mixed logit regression model identified significant heterogeneity in preferences among respondents, and stratified analysis showed that some heterogeneities varied in respondents by demographics and COVID-19-related characteristics. Participants who preferred to use the app were more likely to assign a high weight to the preventive functions than those who did not prefer to use it. Conversely, participants who showed lower willingness to use the app tended to indicate a higher preference for supportive functions than those who preferred to use it.
This study ranks the importance of smartphone app features that provide health care services during a pandemic based on the general population\'s preferences in China. It provides empirical evidence for decision-makers to develop eHealth policies and strategies that address future public health crises from a person-centered care perspective. Continued use of apps and smart investment in digital health can help improve health outcomes and reduce the burden of disease on individuals and communities.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is associated with poor outcomes and is generally incurable. Therefore, understanding preferences of older adults with AML is critical. We sought to assess whether best-worst scaling (BWS) can be used to capture attributes considered by older adults with AML when making initial treatment decisions and longitudinally, as well as assess changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and decisional regret over time.
In a longitudinal study for adults ≥60 years with newly diagnosed AML, we collected: (1) attributes of treatment most important to patients using BWS, (2) HRQoL using EQ-5D-5L, (3) decisional regret using the Decisional Regret Scale, and (4) treatment worthiness using the \"Was it worth it?\" questionnaire. Data was collected at baseline and over six months. A hierarchical Bayes model was used to allocate percentages out of 100%. Due to small sample size, hypothesis testing was performed at α = 0.10 (2-tailed). We analyzed how these measures differed by treatment choice (intensive vs. lower intensity treatment).
Mean age of patients was 76 years (n = 15). At baseline, the most important attributes of treatment to patients were response to treatment (i.e., chance that the cancer will respond to treatment; 20.9%). Compared to those who received lower intensity treatment (n = 7) or best supportive care (n = 2), those who received intensive treatment (n = 6) generally ranked \"alive one year or more after treatment\" (p = 0.03) with higher importance and ranked \"daily activities\" (p = 0.01) and \"location of treatment\" (p = 0.01) with less importance. Overall, HRQoL scores were high. Decisional regret was mild overall and lower for patients who chose intensive treatment (p = 0.06).
We demonstrated that BWS can be used to assess the importance of various treatment attributes considered by older adults with AML when making initial treatment decisions and longitudinally throughout treatment. Attributes of treatment important to older patients with AML differed between treatment groups and changed over time. Interventions are needed to re-assess patient priorities throughout treatment to ensure care aligns with patient preferences.