This is a past event
Professor Julie Ratcliffe is the guest presenter of this HERU seminar. Professor Ratcliffe is Professor of Health Economics in the Institute for Choice, School of Business at the University of South Australia. She also holds honorary professorial positions in the Institute for Health and Wellbeing at the University of Glasgow and the School of Health and Related Research at the University of Sheffield. From 1992 to 1995 she was a Research Fellow in HERU and has since held academic positions at Brunel University, the University of Sheffield and Flinders University. During the course of her career, Julie has published over 190 papers in peer reviewed journals and she has been a chief investigator on over 40 multi-disciplinary research grants including grants awarded by the NHMRC and ARC in Australia and the MRC and ESRC in the UK. Her research interests include the measurement and valuation of health and quality of life outcomes, patient preferences and the economic evaluation of interventions across health and social care sectors.
The title of the presentation is: Best worst scaling versus traditional ranking generated preferences for attributes of quality of life. One and the same or different? An empirical investigation in an Australian general population sample.
Abstract: Best worst scaling is gaining increasing prominence in health economics as a method for eliciting patient and general population preferences for health and health care. The method was originally developed by Louviere and colleagues as an efficient method of data collection, the primary purpose of which, via repeated rounds of best-worst choices, is simply to obtain a full ranking of items in a manner that is “comparatively easier” for respondents to undertake relative to a traditional ranking exercise. One way in which this hypothesis may be formally tested is to examine the relative level of choice consistency (the variability in choice outcomes not explained by attributes and their associated preference weights) for best worst scaling generated responses relative to traditional ranking. This presentation will report the methods and preliminary results from a study that sought to address this issue through simultaneous application of successive best worst and conventional ranking methods to assess the relative importance of key dimensions of quality of life in two samples of the Australian general population differentiated by age (younger and older person). Whilst the findings indicate broad agreement overall, some inconsistencies are evident highlighting that these two methods of data collection may not be interchangeable.
Note: There will be no sandwich lunch at this event.
- Hosted by
- Dr Shelley Farrar
- Venue
- Rm1:029, Polwarth Building