Best-worst scaling

最佳 - 最差缩放
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:数字干预在康复中变得越来越流行。对影响临床医生采用和满意度的设备特征的理解是有限的。该领域的研究应在不同的环境中进行,以确保数字干预不会加剧医疗保健不平等。
    目的:本研究旨在了解康复临床医生对器械属性的偏好,并包括跨文化比较。
    方法:选择实验方法(最佳-最差量表)用于调查澳大利亚和巴西的康复临床医生。参与者完成了10个最佳-最差的问题,在部分平衡块设计中,从31个属性的子集中选择最重要和最不重要的设备属性。使用多项式模型按国家和潜在类别分析结果。属性偏好得分(PS)被缩放为0-100(至少到最重要)。
    结果:共有122名来自巴西的临床医生和104名来自澳大利亚的临床医生完成了调查。大多数受访者是物理治疗师(83%),与私人/自雇部门(51%)的神经系统人群(51%)一起工作,他们有使用康复设备的经验(87%)。尽管国家和工作部门的偏好异质性(公共/非营利与私人/自雇/其他),临床医生始终优先考虑患者的预后(PS100.0,95CI:86.2-100.0),患者参与度(PS93.9,95CI:80.6-94.2),可用性(PS81.3,95CI:68.8-82.5),研究证据(PS80.4,95CI:68.1-81.7)和风险(PS75.7,95CI:63.8-77.3)。在澳大利亚,临床医生青睐有助于增加治疗剂量的器械属性(PS79.2,95CI:62.6-81.1),并鼓励患者独立实践(PS66.8,95CI:52.0-69.2).在巴西,临床医生首选能够使用器械提供临床数据(PS67.6,95CI:51.8~70.9)和进行临床评估(PS65.6,95CI:50.2~68.8)的属性.
    结论:临床医生优先考虑患者的需求和实际应用,而不是数字康复设备的技术方面。背景因素决定了临床医生的偏好而不是个体临床医生的特征。未来的设备设计和研究应考虑偏好和影响,让不同的利益相关者参与进来,以解释不同文化和医疗环境的上下文驱动的变化。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    多种治疗方案可用于治疗与慢性肾脏疾病(CKD)相关的贫血;然而,医生和患者对这些治疗的偏好仍然缺乏认识.我们旨在探讨日本医师和患者对CKD贫血管理的看法和偏好。
    一项基于网络的调查,包括最佳-最差缩放(BWS),与前一年治疗≥1例CKD贫血患者的医生一起进行,以及自我报告临床诊断为CKD贫血或低血红蛋白水平的CKD患者。使用了三步方法,包括认知访谈,试点调查,和主要调查。使用多项logit和分层贝叶斯模型对BWS调查结果进行分析。
    调查由906名参与者完成:103名患者(平均年龄60.6岁;77.7%为男性)和803名医生(166名肾脏科医师,214位心脏病专家,137位糖尿病专家,和286名一般内科医生)。几乎所有(96.0%)接受调查的医生都认为CKD贫血是需要治疗的重要疾病。在医生中,缺氧诱导因子脯氨酸酰羟化酶(HIF-PH)抑制剂的治疗满意度最高。而患者对促红细胞生成素刺激剂治疗和HIF-PH抑制剂的满意度最高.接受调查的患者中约有三分之一(35.9%)表示正在接受治疗。比较属性和级别的相对重要性时,医生青睐疗效(特别是血红蛋白水平的改善),而患者倾向于安全性(尤其是较低的严重不良事件发生率).
    尽管大多数医生认为治疗CKD相关贫血很重要,医学专业之间对药物的认知和使用存在差异。对CKD贫血管理的偏好在医生和患者之间有所不同;因此,患者参与治疗决策可能有助于优化结果.
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    高质量的陈述偏好(SP)调查的开发需要严格的设计过程,涉及目标人群的代表参与。然而,虽然鼓励报告SP调查发展的透明度,很少有研究报告这一过程和结果。仪器开发的推荐阶段包括利益相关者/最终用户参与和预测试两个步骤。前测通常包括面试,经常跨越多个波浪,在每一波都有改进;因此,预测试是资源密集型的。本文的目的是报告在SP调查的设计阶段与路易体痴呆症研究咨询小组合作的结果。我们还评估了仪器开发的替代方法,资源受限的环境所必需的。
    该方法涉及在公众参与活动期间进行最终用户参与和预先测试的阶段。采用了一种混合方法,该方法涉及一个具有突破性访谈的焦点小组。来自贡献者的反馈告知了调查工具的演变。
    对测量工具的更改分为四类:属性修改;选择任务的演示和理解;信息演示,清晰度和内容;以及最佳-最佳缩放演示。混合方法促进了小组头脑风暴,同时仍允许研究人员在面试环境中评估选择任务的可行性。然而,通过这种方法,更多的个体探索和尝试跨波迭代改进的机会是不可行的.
    研究咨询小组的参与导致了更加以人为本的调查设计。在受时间和预算限制的情况下,并考虑到目标人群的能力和脆弱性,所采取的方法是改进SP调查设计的可行和务实的机制。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:倾听患者的声音至关重要,就人们如何体验他们的病情以及他们的治疗偏好而言。这项研究探索了病人的旅程,有治疗经验的成人慢性淋巴细胞白血病(CLL)患者的治疗属性和目标.我们试图了解病人的经历,需求和期望,以确定改善治疗和护理提供的领域。
    方法:为完成CLL患者开发了两个在线调查。在阶段1中,参与者完成了最佳-最差缩放(BWS)任务,以评估11个先前验证过的重要医疗旅程时刻(MTM)。反应用于产生患者体验指数(PEI)评分。在第2阶段,参与者完成了一项调查,其中包括通过评估七个特征的相对属性重要性(RAI)来评估治疗偏好驱动因素的离散选择实验(DCE)和探索长期治疗目标的BWS练习。
    结果:25例患者完成1期,30例患者完成2期。治疗经验在口服和静脉药物之间平衡。最重要/最不满意的MTM是治疗效果,获得支持和其他治疗以及监测进展。PEI评分中位数为66.2(满分100)。DCE结果表明,患者最重视与无进展生存期延长相关的CLL治疗(PFS;RAI:24.6%),其次是严重副作用风险较低、自付费用较低的治疗(RAI:19.5%,17.4%,分别)。决策中的剩余权重(38.5%)在剩余属性之间分割,即“轻度至中度副作用”(13.4%),“长期风险”(12.2%),治疗类型(即,口服,静脉注射或口服和静脉注射的组合;8.7%)和治疗持续时间(即,持续与固定;4.2%)。患者更喜欢口服至静脉治疗。最重要的长期治疗目标是身体健康,然后是长寿,与家人/朋友共度时光,避免住院。
    结论:有经验的CLL患者的治疗重点是接受有效的,安全的治疗方法和长期PFS的价值。考虑和讨论其他属性,例如每日一次给药,仅口服药物,自付费用和获得支持服务可能会影响患者的治疗选择,并最终提高他们的医疗体验和结果。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    实现草地资源的市场价值对于寻求生态保护与经济发展的平衡具有重要意义。作为一种原产于青藏高原的独特家畜动物,牦牛在维持生态系统稳定方面发挥着重要作用,确保牧民的生计,促进社会经济发展,维护民族文化传统。然而,鉴于其市场份额较小,对推动中国消费者对牦牛肉偏好的因素知之甚少。这项研究旨在通过一项在线调查调查消费者对牦牛肉的偏好,该调查涉及来自中国五个城市的2999名受访者。通过使用购买方案,采用最佳-最差缩放方法来测量牦牛肉不同属性的相对重要性。结果表明,质量安全认证,新鲜度,和生产可持续性被认为是最优选的属性,而动物福利,品牌,采购渠道被发现是最不受欢迎的。此外,在消费者偏好中发现了显著的异质性。消费者分为三类,即价格敏感的消费者,\'\'环境友好的消费者,\'和\'牦牛肉倾斜的消费者,\'分别。我们的发现可能有助于政策制定者和牦牛肉生产者制定有针对性的策略,以促进牦牛肉的销售,然后恢复退化的草原。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    进入安全,负担得起的饮食对于改善营养结果至关重要。然而,利益相关者如何看待有约束力的约束和必要的政策行动,以增加食品安全和负担能力?专注于尼日利亚,本文使用了对200个政府和农业食品系统利益相关者进行的调查的最佳-最差缩放技术,以检查他们对蔬菜和鱼类价值链的安全性和可负担性的政策信念。我们发现,对于食品安全而言,利益相关者之间的分歧大于可负担性。抗生素过度使用和毒素暴露,缺乏知识,不同的利益相关者将薄弱的立法确定为食品安全的约束性约束,投入和基础设施的高成本,以及安全威胁,被视为大多数人负担能力的共同挑战,虽然不是全部,这两个价值链的利益相关者。总的来说,本文强调了信念在农业食品系统政策制定过程中的重要性,并强调不仅需要更深入地探索政策参与者之间存在分歧信念的来源。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:以患者为中心的治疗和研究应该关注对患者重要的结果。这项研究的主要目的是确定肌肉骨骼创伤后患者的预后偏好。次要目的是确定外科医生和患者的结果偏好之间的差异。
    方法:对下肢手术损伤患者和接受创伤呼叫的整形外科医生进行了一项最佳-最差缩放选择实验调查。参与者完成了3个随机排序结果的13个选择集,包括:完全恢复(恢复正常),没有任何问题;需要额外的手术或住院时间,而不是在诊所/急诊科接受药物治疗的问题;6周的轻度至中度和重度疼痛;需要拐杖/助行器与轮椅6-12周;无法工作6-12周;在设施中需要2-4周;1年时,完美与不良或最差的EuroQol5维度(EQ-5D和得分);在每一组中,参与者将他们的“最优选”结果排名为“最不优选”结果。汇总响应以计算相对重要性,或边际效用,按受访者类型分层的每个结果。
    结果:有55名患者和65名外科医生参加。患者和外科医生最喜欢的结果是完全康复(恢复正常),没有任何问题,随后轻微至中度疼痛持续6周,并获得完美的EQ-5D评分。最不喜欢的结果是死亡和最差的EQ-5D得分,具有相似的边际效用,接着是一个糟糕的EQ-5D评分和一个需要再次手术或住院的问题,也有类似的边际效用。外科医生,与患者相比,在一年内分配更高的边际效用来完善EQ-5D分数(3.55与2.03;p<0.0001)和在设施中停留2-4周(0.52vs.-0.21;p=0.001),和6周内对严重疼痛的边际效用较低(-0.58vs.-0.08;p=0.04)和较差的EQ-5D得分(-1.88vs.-1.03;p=0.02)。
    结论:对于患者和外科医生来说,完全康复(恢复正常)是最优选的结果。以患者为中心的护理和研究应关注患者恢复基线和避免并发症。
    方法:不适用。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    不健康的饮食习惯是昂贵的,会导致严重的疾病,如肥胖。营养应用程序提供了一种有希望的方法来改善饮食行为。游戏化元素(GEs)可以激励用户继续使用营养应用程序,使其更加愉快,这可能会导致饮食选择方面更积极的行为改变。然而,用户偏好和个人特征对游戏化系统的影响尚不清楚。当前的研究呼吁表明,个性化的游戏化系统可能会导致用户满意度,连续使用应用程序,并最终长期改善饮食。
    目的是确定营养应用中最喜欢的GEs,并根据个性和社会人口统计特征定义GEs偏好的集群。
    我们调查了308人,以衡量他们在营养应用中对GEs的偏好,并应用最佳-最差比例来确定最受欢迎的GEs。此外,我们使用聚类分析来识别不同的用户聚类,并根据个性和社会人口统计特征对其进行描述.
    我们确定GEs最受欢迎的是目标,进度条,和优惠券。我们在个性和社会人口统计学特征方面揭示了三个不同的用户集群。基于开放性和自我感知的个体因素,我们发现,排行榜和优惠券的偏好存在显著差异。
    我们通过阐明与特定环境和个体因素相关的GE偏好的差异和相似性做出贡献,揭示个性化营养应用程序的潜力。我们的发现将使个人受益,应用程序设计师,和公共卫生机构。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    主观幸福感(SWB)描述了一个人的生活评估。通过评定量表对SWB的直接启发方法不会迫使个人在生活领域之间进行权衡,而最佳-最差缩放(BWS)方法仅提供相对度量。本文提供了双响应BWS任务,受访者提名11个SWB领域中最重要和最不满意的领域,同时还引出锚点以获得域满意度的绝对度量。将域满意度和重要性相结合,可以产生对个体SWB的稳健度量,但相对于其他利用单项目和多项目评级的生活满意度衡量标准,包括全球满意度和在SWB域上汇总的满意度,以及Eudemonia.对2500名澳大利亚人进行的调查显示,锚定BWS在重要性和满意度方面改善了领域之间的歧视,说明其作为SWB测量诊断工具的价值,以关注服务,政策,以及对福祉影响最大的领域的举措。这包括强调健康满意度和重要性之间的重大差异,同时还报告说土著居民的SWB明显较低,失业,中年,男性和低收入群体。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Editorial
    必须增强可用于制定实施策略和支持知识翻译的方法库。陈述的首选项方法,包括离散选择实验(DCE)和最佳-最差缩放(BWS),植根于经济学,表现得很健壮,理论驱动的工具,用于理解和影响创新的接受者和提供者的行为。本评论概述了既定偏好方法在实施连续体中的广泛应用,迎来有效的知识翻译。在实施科学中利用这些方法的前景包括(1)完善和定制干预和实施策略,(2)探索实施决定因素的相对重要性,(3)确定关键决策者的关键成果,和4)告知政策优先次序。实施既定偏好研究的结果具有使健康产品和服务与患者需求精确保持一致的潜力,提供者,社区,和政策制定者,从而实现公平的影响。
    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.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号