< Conjoint Analysis in Health – Good Research Practices
GRP logo
Conjoint Analysis in Health – Good Research Practices

Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health—A Checklist: A Report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force

The citation is:
Bridges, JFP, Hauber, AB, Marshall, D, et al. Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health—a Checklist: A Report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force.Value Health 2011;14:403-13.

Editorial: Taking Conjoint Analysis to Task
Mandy Ryan, PhD Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, UK

John F. P. Bridges, PhD, Assistant Professor, Department of Health Policy & Management Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

Leadership Group:
A. Brett Hauber PhD
Senior Economist & Global Head, Health Preference Assessment, RTI Health Solutions, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
Deborah Marshall PhD, Canada Research Chair, Health Services and Systems Research & Associate Professor, Department of Community Health Sciences Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Andrew Lloyd DPhil, Director, Oxford Outcomes, Oxford, UK
Lisa A. Prosser PhD, Research Associate Professor, Child Health Evaluation and Research Unit, Department of Pediatrics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Dean Regier PhD, Research Associate, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada
F. Reed Johnson PhD, Distinguished Fellow and Principal Economist, Health Preference Assessment Group, RTI Health Solutions, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA
Josephine Mauskopf PhD, Vice President, Health Economics, RTI Health Solutions, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC USA

The objective of this Task Force is the development of a checklist for good research practices for the applications of conjoint analysis in outcomes research.  This checklist would present and illustrate good research practices for those undertaking conjoint analysis in outcomes research, for those peer reviewing or interpreting the results of such analyses. The checklist would also provide a sound, consensus based, framework for future working group and working group activities (such as ISPOR online and conference short courses).

Conjoint analysis and other methods to measure patient and other stakeholder preferences are increasingly being used in outcomes research, and even more broadly in health care and medicine, as a means to identify and evaluate the relative importance of aspects of health outcomes and health-care services. Despite the growing number of researchers using conjoint analysis in health care, there persists significant variability in the quality of conjoint analysis methods.  To overcome this application & quality variability, a means to assess good research practices is needed to promote adoption of better methods.

ISPOR members and external experts from six countries contributed to the consensus development of the task force report via comments made during a Forum presentation at the 2009 ISPOR 14th Annual International Meeting in Orlando, Florida, through the comments received from the manuscript’s circulation to the Conjoint Analysis Reviewer Group and an international group of reviewers selected by the task force chair.

The task force met in person in September 2009 to discuss and come to consensus on the more controversial issues raised.  The manuscript was revised as appropriate to address comments from these three review opportunities. The final step in the consensus process was circulation of the report to the ISPOR membership in September 2010 with an invitation to review and comment. A total of 40 reviewers submitted written or verbal comments from these four occasions to review the draft report.

ISPOR Good Practices For Outcomes Research Index