Test-retest reliability of willingness to pay
Tóm tắt
We describe the results of a survey designed to assess the test-retest reliability of a method of establishing willingness to pay. Willingness to pay values for a hypothetical intervention were elicited from a randomly selected, population sample by face-to-face interview on three occasions over a period of 5 weeks. Test-retest reliability was assessed by intraclass correlation and by generalizability analysis. Reliability was acceptable but not substantial, and there was a statistically significant shift in mean value between first and second assessments. The greatest source of variation in values was the participants. There was also a substantial interaction between time and participants, suggesting that some respondents changed their answers at follow-up. The results were sensitive to the high valuations provided by four of the participants, however.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Arrow K, Solow R, Portney P et al. (1993) Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed Regist 58: 4601–4614
Bravo G, Potvin L (1991) Estimating the reliability of continuous measures with Cronbach’s alpha or the intraclass correlation coefficient: toward the integration of two traditions. J Clin Epidemiol 44: 381–390
Cronbach LJ, Rajaratnam N, Gleser GC (1963) Theory of generalizability: a liberation of reliability theory. Br J Stat Psychol 16: 137–163
Diener A, O’Brien B, Gafni A (1998) Health care contingent valuation studies: a review and classification of the literature. Health Econ 7: 313–326
Donaldson C, Shackley P (1997) Does “process utility” exist? A case study of willingness to pay for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Soc Sci Med 44: 699–707
EuroQol Group (1990) EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 16: 199–208
Gafni A (1991) Willingness-to-pay as a measure of benefits: relevant questions in the context of public decision making about health care programs. Med Care 29: 1246–1252
Kish L (1996) Survey sampling. Wiley: New York
Klose T (1999) The contingent valuation method in health care. Health Policy 47: 97–123
Krabbe PFM, Essink-Bot ML, Bonsel GJ (1997) The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods. Soc Sci Med 45: 1641–1652
Marcoulides GA (1999) Generalizability theory: picking up where the Rasch IRT model leaves off? In: Embretson SE, Hershberger SL. (eds) The new rules of measurement: what every psychologist and educator should know. Lawrence Erlbaum: Mahwah
Norman GR, Streiner DL (2000) Biostatistics: the bare essentials. Becker: Hamilton
O’Brien B, Viramontes JL (1994) Willingness to pay: a valid and reliable measure of health state preference? Med Decis Making 14: 289–297
O’Connor AM, Boyd NF, Warde P et al. (1987) Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: influence of treatment outcome description, elicitation technique and treatment experience on preferences. J Chronic Dis 40: 811–818
Olsen JA, Smith RD (2001) Theory versus practice: a review of ‘willingness to pay’ in health and health care. Health Econ 10: 39–52
Ryan M (1998) Valuing psychological factors in the provision of assisted reproductive techniques using the economic instrument of willingness to pay. J Econ Psychol 19: 179–204
Shiell A, Hawe P, Fletcher M (2003) Reliability of health utility measures and a test of values clarification. Soc Sci Med 56: 1531–1541
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86: 420–428
Streiner DL, Norman GR (1995) Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development. Oxford University Press: Oxford
Thompson MS, Read JL, Liang M (1984) Feasibility of willingness to pay measurement in chronic arthritis. Med Decis Making 4: 195–215
Van Agt HM, Essink-Bot ML, Krabbe PF, Bonsel GJ (1994) Test-retest reliability of health state valuations collected with the EuroQol questionnaire. Soc Sci Med 39: 1537–1544