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.

BACKGROUND: Digital interventions are becoming increasingly popular in rehabilitation. Understanding of device features which impact clinician adoption and satisfaction is limited. Research in the field should be conducted across diverse settings to ensure digital interventions do not exacerbate healthcare inequities.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand rehabilitation clinicians\' preferences regarding device attributes and included a cross-cultural comparison.
METHODS: Choice experiment methodology (best-worst scaling) was used to survey rehabilitation clinicians across Australia and Brazil. Participants completed 10 best-worst questions, choosing the most and least important device attributes from subsets of 31 attributes in a partially balanced block design. Results were analysed using multinomial models by country and latent class. Attribute preference scores (PS) were scaled to 0-100 (least to most important).
RESULTS: A total of 122 clinicians from Brazil and 104 clinicians from Australia completed the survey. Most respondents were physiotherapists (83%) working with neurological populations (51%) in the private/self-employed sector (51%) who had experience using rehabilitation devices (87%). Despite preference heterogeneity across country and work sector (public/not-for-profit versus private/self-employed/other), clinicians consistently prioritised patient outcomes (PS 100.0, 95%CI: 86.2-100.0), patient engagement (PS 93.9, 95%CI: 80.6-94.2), usability (PS 81.3, 95%CI: 68.8-82.5), research evidence (PS 80.4, 95%CI: 68.1-81.7) and risk (PS 75.7, 95%CI: 63.8-77.3). In Australia, clinicians favoured device attributes which facilitate increased therapy dosage (PS 79.2, 95%CI: 62.6-81.1) and encourage patient independent practice (PS 66.8, 95%CI: 52.0-69.2). In Brazil, clinicians preferred attributes enabling device use for providing clinical data (PS 67.6, 95%CI: 51.8-70.9) and conducting clinical assessments (PS 65.6, 95%CI: 50.2-68.8).
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians prioritise patients\' needs and practical application over technical aspects of digital rehabilitation devices. Contextual factors shape clinician preferences rather than individual clinician characteristics. Future device design and research should consider preferences and influences, involving diverse stakeholders to account for context-driven variations across cultures and healthcare settings.

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.

Realizing the market value of grassland resources is of great significance to finding a balance between ecological protection and economic development. As a unique livestock animal that is native to the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau, the yak plays an important role in maintaining ecosystem stability, ensuring the livelihoods of herdsmen, promoting socio-economic development, and preserving ethnic cultural traditions. However, given its small market share, little is known about the factors that drive Chinese consumer preferences for yak meat. This study aimed to investigate consumer preferences for yak meat by means of an online survey involving a sample of 2999 respondents from five cities in China. The best-worst scaling method was employed to measure the relative importance of different attributes of yak meat by using a purchasing scenario. The results indicated that quality-safety certification, freshness, and production sustainability were regarded as the most preferred attributes, whereas animal welfare, brand, and the purchasing channel were found to be the least preferred. In addition, significant heterogeneity was detected in consumer preferences. Consumers were divided into three classes, namely \'Price Sensitive Consumers,\' \'Environmentally Friendly Consumers,\' and \'Yak Meat Inclined Consumers,\' respectively. Our findings might be helpful for policymakers and yak meat producers to develop targeted strategies to facilitate the sale of yak meat and then restore degraded grasslands.

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.

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered treatment and research should focus on the outcomes that matter to patients. The primary aim of this study was to determine the outcome preferences of patients after musculoskeletal trauma. The secondary aim was to identify discrepancies between outcome preferences of surgeons and patients.
METHODS: A Best-worst scaling choice experiment survey was administered to patients with operative lower extremity injuries and orthopaedic surgeons who take trauma call. Participants completed 13 choice sets of 3 randomly-ordered outcomes, including: a full recovery (back to normal) without any problems; a problem that requires additional surgery or hospital stay versus medication or treatment in clinic/emergency department; minimal to moderate versus severe pain for 6 weeks; need for crutches/walker versus wheelchair for 6-12 weeks; being unable to work for 6-12 weeks; requiring 2-4 weeks in a facility; a perfect versus poor or worst-possible EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) score at 1 year; and death. Within each set, participants ranked their \"most-preferred\" to \"least-preferred\" outcomes. Responses were aggregated to calculate the relative importance, or marginal utility, of each outcome stratified by respondent type.
RESULTS: Fifty-five patients and 65 surgeons participated. The most preferred outcome for patients and surgeons was a full recovery (back to normal) without any problems, followed by minimal to moderate pain for 6 weeks and a perfect EQ-5D score. The least preferred outcomes were death and the worst EQ-5D score, which had similar marginal utility, followed by a poor EQ-5D score and a problem that needs another surgery or stay at a hospital, which also had similar marginal utility. Surgeons, in comparison to patients, assigned a higher marginal utility to perfect EQ-5D scores at one year (3.55 vs. 2.03; p < 0.0001) and a 2-4 week stay in a facility (0.52 vs. -0.21; p = 0.001), and a lower marginal utility to severe pain for 6 weeks (-0.58 vs. -0.08; p = 0.04) and a poor EQ-5D score (-1.88 vs. -1.03; p = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: A full recovery (back to normal) without any problems was the most-preferred outcome for both patients and surgeons. Patient-centered care and research should focus on both patients\' return to baseline and the avoidance of complications.
METHODS: N/A.

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.

Subjective well-being (SWB) describes an individual\'s life evaluation. Direct elicitation methods for SWB via rating scales do not force individuals to trade-off among life domains, whilst best-worst scaling (BWS) approaches only provide relative measures. This paper instead offers a dual-response BWS task, where respondents nominate areas of most and least importance and satisfaction with respect to 11 SWB domains, whilst also eliciting anchoring points to obtain an absolute measure of domain satisfaction. Combining domain satisfaction and importance produces a robust measure of individual SWB, but statistically unique relative to other life satisfaction measures utilizing single- and multi-item ratings, including global satisfaction and those aggregated over SWB domains, as well as eudemonia. Surveying 2500 Australians reveals anchored-BWS improves discrimination amongst domains in terms of importance and satisfaction, illustrating its value as a diagnostic tool for SWB measurement to focus services, policy, and initiatives in areas to most impact wellbeing. This includes highlighting a major discrepancy between health satisfaction and importance, whilst also reporting that SWB is significantly lower for Indigenous, unemployed, middle-aged, males and lower income groups.