How psychological distance of a study sample in discrete choice experiments affects preference measurement: a colorectal cancer screening case study

Jorien Veldwijk1 Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, [email protected];2 Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, [email protected];3 Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands, [email protected]Correspondence[email protected]

Catharina G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn4 Health Technology and Services Research, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands

Ulrik Kihlbom2 Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, [email protected];5 Department of Health Economics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden;6 Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

Sophie Langenskiöld2 Centre for Research Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden, [email protected];5 Department of Health Economics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden;6 Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

Evelien Dekker7 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Frank G J Kallenberg7 Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

G Ardine de Wit3 Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands, [email protected];8 Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands

Mattijs S Lambooij3 Centre for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, the Netherlands, [email protected]

show all

Citations (7)

Keep up to date with the latest research on this topic with citation updates for this article.

Articles from other publishers (7)

Gillian R. Currie, Catherina G.M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Marinka Twilt, Michelle M. A. Kip, Maarten J. IJzerman, Susanne M. Benseler, Joost F. Swart, Sebastiaan J. Vastert, Nico M. Wulffraat, Rae Yeung & Deborah A Marshall. (2023) What matters most to pediatric rheumatologists in deciding whether to discontinue biologics in a child with juvenile idiopathic arthritis? A best-worst scaling survey. Clinical Rheumatology.
Crossref

Caroline M. Vass, Marco Boeri, Christine Poulos & Alex J. Turner. (2022) Matching and weighting in stated preferences for health care. Journal of Choice Modelling 44, pages 100367.
Crossref

Gwenda Simons, Joshua Caplan, Rachael L. DiSantostefano, Jorien Veldwijk, Matthias Englbrecht, Karin Schölin Bywall, Ulrik Kihlbom, Karim Raza & Marie Falahee. (2022) Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations. Arthritis Research & Therapy 24:1.
Crossref

Xueying Zhang, Yiheng Zhang, Jingyu Chen, Meifen Zhang & Ni Gong. (2021) Psychological distance: a qualitative study of screening barriers among first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer patients. BMC Public Health 21:1.
Crossref

Karin Schölin Bywall, Jorien Veldwijk, Mats G. Hansson, Eva Baecklund, Karim Raza, Marie Falahee & Ulrik Kihlbom. (2021) Does being exposed to an educational tool influence patient preferences? The influence of an educational tool on patient preferences assessed by a discrete choice experiment.. Patient Education and Counseling 104:10, pages 2577-2585.
Crossref

Marie Falahee, Gwenda Simons, Rachael L DiSantostefano, Larissa Valor Méndez, Christine Radawski, Matthias Englbrecht, Karin Schölin Bywall, Stephanie Tcherny-Lessenot, Ulrik Kihlbom, Brett Hauber, Jorien Veldwijk & Karim Raza. (2021) Treatment preferences for preventive interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: protocol of a mixed methods case study for the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project. BMJ Open 11:4, pages e045851.
Crossref

Mattijs S. Lambooij, Jorien Veldwijk, Paul F. van Gils, Anita W. M. Suijkerbuijk & Jeroen N. Struijs. (2020) Trading patients’ choice in providers for quality of maternity care? A discrete choice experiment amongst pregnant women. PLOS ONE 15:4, pages e0232098.
Crossref

How psychological distance of a study sample in discrete choice experiments affects preference measurement: a colorectal cancer screening case study

Articles from other publishers (7)

Information for

Open access

Opportunities

Help and information

Your download is now in progress and you may close this window

Login or register to access this feature

How psychological distance of a study sample in discrete choice experiments affects preference measurement: a colorectal cancer screening case study

Citations (7)

Articles from other publishers (7)

Related research

To cite this article:

Download citation

Information for

Open access

Opportunities

Help and information

Keep up to date