Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Sep;15(5):513-520.
doi: 10.1007/s40271-022-00581-z. Epub 2022 May 21.

Improvements to Survey Design from Pilot Testing a Discrete-Choice Experiment of the Preferences of Persons Living with HIV for Long-Acting Antiretroviral Therapies

Douglas Barthold  1 , Aaron T Brah  2 , Susan M Graham  2   3   4 , Jane M Simoni  3   5 , Brett Hauber  6   7
Affiliations

Improvements to Survey Design from Pilot Testing a Discrete-Choice Experiment of the Preferences of Persons Living with HIV for Long-Acting Antiretroviral Therapies

Douglas Barthold et al. Patient. 2022 Sep.

Abstract

Background and objective: Development of clear and effective discrete-choice experiment surveys is an important step toward ensuring accurate and usable preference results. Pretest interviews and pilot testing are common in the development of discrete-choice experiments, and it is important for researchers to report details of survey changes resulting from patient feedback elicited in pilot work. This paper details pilot testing of an online discrete-choice experiment to elicit preferences for long-acting antiretroviral therapies among patients with HIV.

Methods: The survey included an introduction to hypothetical treatment options, descriptions of attributes, comprehension questions, instructions for completing a discrete-choice experiment, a discrete-choice experiment with 17 choice tasks, and questions about personal characteristics. We piloted the survey with 50 respondents over ten waves. Each wave incorporated design improvements based on observations made during the previous wave. Respondents completed the online survey while screen sharing with a researcher, allowing interactive discussion. We developed a scheme for assessing and categorizing the survey changes.

Results: Changes to the pilot were categorized by ways they impacted aspects of the discrete-choice experiment or the likely quality of resulting data. The four categories of impact are: understanding of attributes, underlying discrete-choice experiment and understanding of the choice question, collection of individual characteristics hypothesized to affect preference, and changes that improved clarity and usability of the survey without directly affecting the other categories (e.g., survey navigation and instructional clarity, formatting changes).

Conclusions: Detailed attention to the respondent experience in this large pilot allowed survey improvements that will likely reduce ambiguity, ensure more accurate capture of patient preferences and, ultimately, improve product development for long-acting antiretroviral therapies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Brett Hauber was an employee of RTI Health Solutions at the time this research was conducted. Susan M. Graham has received support from Gilead and Cepheid. Jane M. Simoni has received support from Pfizer. Douglas Barthold and Aaron T. Brah have no conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
a Changes that likely impact the understanding of the attributes, across waves. b Changes that likely impact the underlying discrete-choice experiment design, and the understanding of the choice question, across waves. c Changes that likely impact the collection of individual characteristics that may affect choice, across waves. W wave
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Screenshot of video that explains the content on the discrete-choice experiment choice screen
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Soekhai V, Bekker-Grob EW, Ellis AR, et al. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: past, present and future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2019;37(2):201–226. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cohen J, Beaubrun A, Bashyal R, et al. Real-world adherence and persistence for newly-prescribed HIV treatment: single versus multiple tablet regimen comparison among US medicaid beneficiaries. AIDS Res Ther. 2020;17(1):1–12. doi: 10.1186/s12981-020-00268-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hogg RS. Understanding the HIV care continuum. Lancet HIV. 2018;5(6):e269–e270. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3018(18)30102-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kapadia SN, Grant RR, German SB, et al. HIV virologic response better with single-tablet once daily regimens compared to multiple-tablet daily regimens. SAGE Open Med. 2018;6:2050312118816919. doi: 10.1177/2050312118816919. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brah AT, Barthold D, Hauber B, et al. The systematic development of attributes and levels for a discrete choice experiment of HIV patient preferences for long-acting antiretroviral therapies. Unpublished Research Square preprint. 2021. 10.21203/rs.3.rs-719332/v1. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types