Using Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs) to Compare Social and Personal Preferences for Health and Well-Being...

Area of Science:

• Health Economics
• Decision Science
• Public Health Policy

Background:

• Economic evaluations in health often use a nonwelfarist framework, ideally suited for social rather than personal preferences.
• Most health state valuation studies elicit personal preferences, creating a methodological inconsistency.
• Empirical data on the relationship between social and personal preferences for health outcomes is lacking.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate whether eliciting preferences from a social versus personal perspective influences the valuation of health and well-being outcomes.
• To compare social and personal preferences for various health and well-being attributes using identical scenarios.

Main Methods:

• Discrete choice experiments were employed to elicit preferences from the UK general public.
• Two distinct surveys were conducted: one for personal preferences (n=1,020) and one for social preferences (n=3,009).
• Mixed logit models were estimated to calculate willingness-to-pay (WTP) values for attribute comparisons.

Main Results:

• No significant differences were found in the valuation of physical health, mental health, loneliness, or neighborhood safety between social and personal perspectives.
• Significant differences emerged in willingness-to-pay values for employment and housing quality attributes.
• Personal preferences favored retirement over informal caregiving, while social preferences showed the reverse.

Conclusions:

• The perspective from which preferences are elicited significantly impacts the valuation of certain outcomes, notably employment and housing quality.
• Relying solely on personal preferences for valuing employment and housing may result in inefficient public health resource allocation.
• Considering the elicitation perspective is crucial for aligning public health interventions with societal priorities.