A comparison of two methods for eliciting contingent valuations of colorectal cancer screening
Introduction
Recent reviews and surveys of the use of the contingent valuation (CV) method in health technology assessment attest to the technique’s increasing popularity (Olsen, 1997, Diener et al., 1998, Blumenschein and Johannesson, 1999, Klose, 1999, Smith, 2000). The method was originally developed by environmental economists, in response to a need to elicit public valuations for prospective changes in complex, intangible and non-traded goods, such as the destruction of attractive landscapes and the creation or loss of wildlife habitats. CV poses a hypothetical question, via interview or questionnaire in a variety of possible formats, in order to gauge the minimum amount individuals would be willing to accept in compensation, were a pre-specified adverse change to be imposed upon them. For a potentially beneficial change, CV searches for the maximum amount individuals would be willing to pay, to ensure that the prospective change took place. In theoretical terms, the technique is seeking to identify the compensating variations required to maintain each individual at the same utility level, before and after the prospective change, and thereby to estimate the impact of the change on aggregate utility.
The objective of most published studies has been the estimation of CVs in specific medical circumstances, such as maternity care (Ryan et al., 1997), cervical screening (Wordsworth et al., 2001), or treatments for cancer (Ortega et al., 1998), obesity (Narbro and Sjostrom, 2000), incontinence (Johannesson et al., 1997) and angina (Kartman et al., 1996). However, and as all the survey papers are at pains to point out, the CV technique in health care remains essentially unproven. Many issues are unresolved, and these have been signalled by the relatively small number of experimental studies which have addressed themselves specifically to methodological development, as opposed to estimation. Accordingly, “much research on the contingent valuation methodology in health care needs to be performed before results from CV studies can be used with confidence in health care decision making. This is especially true concerning methodological analysis and testing” (Klose, 1999, p. 117).
In this paper, we report the results of a CV study eliciting willingness-to-pay (WTP) for two different screening tests for colorectal cancer. The study was designed explicitly to enable us to explore a number of issues raised in the methodology literature, and therefore incorporates features not necessarily relevant for WTP studies concerned solely with estimation. We used two different WTP formats, with a view to comparing their performances. Beyond this, our elicitation of WTP values was prompted less by a desire to identify the values per se, and more by an interest in discovering the ostensible reasons behind valuation and in exploring the relationships between reasons and values. The existing literature alerted us to the likely presence of confounding variables in explaining WTP, such as gender, age, income and risk perceptions, making us aware of the need for a large sample for analysis. As a result, with a sample size approaching 2800 responses, this was one of the largest CV studies ever undertaken in the health care field.
In the following section, we review briefly the methodological controversies surrounding WTP, and indicate those which were under specific investigation in this study. Thereafter, we describe the study itself, present the results and develop explanatory models of WTP. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings in relation to those of earlier researchers, with a view to establishing whether they are consistent both with previous results and the explanations previously offered.
Section snippets
Methodological controversies
Perhaps the most fundamental methodological question for CV is: if people are providing answers to a hypothetical question, to what degree can their answers be interpreted as real, in the sense of providing an appropriate estimate of each individual’s compensating variation (Liljas and Blumenschein, 2000)? Relatively little research into the motives behind providing specific WTP responses appears to have been undertaken (Clark et al., 2000), although income and affordability considerations have
Screening for colorectal cancer
Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in North America and western Europe (Lieberman and Sleisenger, 1996). The disease appears to follow a well-behaved, staged, progression and this, coupled with recent developments in diagnostic technology, have made it a prime candidate for mass population screening (Mulcahy et al., 1997). Whilst a variety of screening protocols are available for general use in an asymptomatic population (Young et al., 1996, Lieberman, 1998), much of
Analysis
Our intention was to analyse the data using regression analysis, and this necessitated a degree of data re-coding, to create either sets of dummy variables (as in the case of household income, for example) or dichotomous variables (as in the case of risk perception). In addition, one construction was undertaken. Evidence suggests that attitudes towards colorectal cancer screening are influenced by subjects’ orientations towards health education and health promotion more generally. This has been
Discussion
Three classes of characteristics of subjects appear repeatedly in all the models estimated. Subjects are more likely to provide a response to the WTP question, less likely to offer a zero value, and provide higher positive WTP values, as income increases, as attitudes towards disease prevention generally become more positive and as perceptions of risk or concern relating to colorectal cancer are heightened. Such results would be predicted intuitively, which provides some degree of confidence in
Acknowledgements
The study forms part of the evaluation of the UK Flexi-Scope trial, funded by the UK Medical Research Council. The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of members of the Trent Collaborative Research Network in obtaining the primary data. They are also appreciative of helpful comments from the anonymous referees.
References (55)
- et al.
Prevention of colorectal cancer by once-only sigmoidoscopy
The Lancet
(1993) - et al.
Inconsistent responses in three preference-elicitation methods for health states
Social Science and Medicine
(1999) - et al.
Use of contingent valuation to place a monetary value on pharmacy services: an overview and review of the literature
Clinical Therapeutics
(1999) - et al.
“I struggled with this money business”: respondents’ perspectives on contingent valuation
Ecological Economics
(2000) - et al.
Inconsistency and health state valuations
Social Science and Medicine
(1996) Valuing the benefits of publicly-provided health care: does ‘ability to pay’ preclude the use of ‘willingness to pay’?
Social Science and Medicine
(1999)- et al.
Randomised controlled trial of faecal–occult–blood screening for colorectal cancer
The Lancet
(1996) The contingent valuation method in health care
Health Policy
(1999)- et al.
The comparability and reliability of five health-state valuation methods
Social Science and Medicine
(1997) - et al.
Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal–occult–blood test
The Lancet
(1996)
Is it time to recommend screening for colorectal cancer?
The Lancet
On hypothetical bias and calibration in cost-benefit studies
Health Policy
Determinants of persistent compliance with screening for colorectal cancer
Social Science and Medicine
Homo economicus and homo politicus: interpretation and aggregation of environmental values
Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization
Helicopters, hearts and hips: using willingness to pay to set priorities for public sector health care programmes
Social Science and Medicine
Strategic overbidding in contingent valuation: stated economic value of public goods varies according to consumers expectations of funding source
Journal of Economic Psychology
Testing for consistency in willingness to pay experiments
Journal of Economic Psychology
Using willingness to pay to value alternative models of antenatal care
Social Science and Medicine
Ecosystems, contingent valuation and ethics: the case of wetland re-creation
Ecological Economics
Uptake, yield of neoplasia, and adverse effects of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening
Gut
Pilot bowel screening scheme to start in Britain
British Medical Journal
Health care contingent valuation studies: a review and classification of the literature
Health Economics
Using willingness to pay to value close substitutes: carrier screening for cystic fibrosis revisited
Health Economics
Validity of open-ended and payment scale approaches to eliciting willingness to pay
Applied Economics
Limited dependent variables in willingness to pay studies: applications in health care
Applied Economics
Smearing estimate: a nonparametric retransformation method
Journal of the American Statistical Association
Factors affecting compliance with screening for colorectal cancer
Community Medicine
Cited by (60)
Survey on Willingness to Pay for Life-Saving Treatment, Functional Recovery, and Cosmesis in a Neuroscience Outpatient Clinic Setting in Singapore
2020, Value in Health Regional IssuesWillingness to pay for diagnostic technologies: A review of the contingent valuation literature
2013, Value in HealthCitation Excerpt :Despite its limitations, WTP analysis provides a standard, well-accepted approach to capturing preferences, which can be used to inform whether a technology represents good value for money. Further research is needed to identify the relative accuracy, precision, and pros and cons of various WTP measurement techniques, as suggested by great variation in WTP estimates across studies examining colon and colorectal cancer screening [21,22,24–26,50,60–62]. In addition, further research is needed to identify how methodological choice and population sampled can result in differences in WTP estimates.
A welfare economic approach to measure outcomes in stuttering: Comparing willingness to pay and quality adjusted life years
2012, Journal of Fluency DisordersParents’ Willingness to Pay for Pediatric Weight Management Programs
2019, Academic PediatricsCitation Excerpt :There is ongoing debate in the literature as to the best method to elicit WTP.13 One technique used in other studies investigating the value of weight-control treatment9 is the open-ended question method, where participants are simply asked the amount they are willing to pay using a single, open-ended question.13 Others have instead advocated for using the bidding game, or WTP by iteration, which asks a series of binary questions, offering a first amount (eg, $10).
Should Commercial Diagnostic Testing Be Stimulated or Discouraged? Analyzing Willingness-to-Pay and Market Externalities of Three Commercial Diagnostic Tests in The Netherlands
2024, Applied Health Economics and Health PolicyCommentaries on and Prospects of the Water Diversion Project
2023, Advances in Earth Science