Embedding a Choice Experiment in an Online Decision Aid or Tool: Scoping Review

Area of Science:

• Health Services Research
• Patient Decision Making
• Health Informatics

Background:

• Patient decision aids empower individuals by aligning treatment choices with personal values.
• Choice experiments are a key method for eliciting patient preferences within decision aids.
• The increasing integration of choice experiments into decision tools necessitates a review of current methodologies.

Purpose of the Study:

• To conduct a scoping review of how choice experiments are embedded into patient decision tools.
• To examine the evaluation methods used for these decision tools.
• To identify best practices for embedding choice experiments and evaluating decision tools.

Main Methods:

• Followed PRISMA extension guidelines for scoping reviews.
• Conducted systematic searches across MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Web of Science.
• Extracted and synthesized data on methodology, development, and evaluation using narrative synthesis.

Main Results:

• Included 33 papers detailing 22 decision tools for various conditions (musculoskeletal, oncological, chronic).
• Most tools (77%) originated in the US, with a surge in publications since 2015.
• Adaptive conjoint analysis was common; four proof-of-concept embedding methods were identified. Tools provided tailored information, attribute importance, or treatment rankings.
• Evaluation involved diverse designs and over 40 outcomes, with the decisional conflict scale most frequent.

Conclusions:

• Identified a lack of established best practices for embedding choice experiments in decision tools.
• Highlighted the limited number of proof-of-concept embedding methods (four identified).
• Emphasized the need for consensus on outcome measures for future evaluations of decision tools.