Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 1/2014

01-03-2014 | Practical Application

Segmenting Patients and Physicians Using Preferences from Discrete Choice Experiments

Author: Ken Deal

Published in: The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

People often form groups or segments that have similar interests and needs and seek similar benefits from health providers. Health organizations need to understand whether the same health treatments, prevention programs, services, and products should be applied to everyone in the relevant population or whether different treatments need to be provided to each of several segments that are relatively homogeneous internally but heterogeneous among segments. Our objective was to explain the purposes, benefits, and methods of segmentation for health organizations, and to illustrate the process of segmenting health populations based on preference coefficients from a discrete choice conjoint experiment (DCE) using an example study of prevention of cyberbullying among university students. We followed a two-level procedure for investigating segmentation incorporating several methods for forming segments in Level 1 using DCE preference coefficients and testing their quality, reproducibility, and usability by health decision makers. Covariates (demographic, behavioral, lifestyle, and health state variables) were included in Level 2 to further evaluate quality and to support the scoring of large databases and developing typing tools for assigning those in the relevant population, but not in the sample, to the segments. Several segmentation solution candidates were found during the Level 1 analysis, and the relationship of the preference coefficients to the segments was investigated using predictive methods. Those segmentations were tested for their quality and reproducibility and three were found to be very close in quality. While one seemed better than others in the Level 1 analysis, another was very similar in quality and proved ultimately better in predicting segment membership using covariates in Level 2. The two segments in the final solution were profiled for attributes that would support the development and acceptance of cyberbullying prevention programs among university students. Those segments were very different—where one wanted substantial penalties against cyberbullies and were willing to devote time to a prevention program, while the other felt no need to be involved in prevention and wanted only minor penalties. Segmentation recognizes key differences in why patients and physicians prefer different health programs and treatments. A viable segmentation solution may lead to adapting prevention programs and treatments for each targeted segment and/or to educating and communicating to better inform those in each segment of the program/treatment benefits. Segment members’ revealed preferences showing behavioral changes provide the ultimate basis for evaluating the segmentation benefits to the health organization.
Footnotes
1
HB is a two-level procedure that shares information among respondents at the higher level using a multivariate normal distribution while estimating at the lower level using multinomial logit regression. While coefficients at the individual level could have been obtained from LCA, HB assumes a continuous distribution of heterogeneity which appears to be closer to this data than the discrete assumption of LCA [75]. Those individual estimates can be obtained from LCA by multiplying the PWUs for segments by respondents’ posterior probabilities of membership in each segment. The coefficients from LCA may be less accurate than HB at estimating respondent preferences [47]. Also, HB may be somewhat more effective in alleviating the independence from irrelevant alternatives (IIA) problems [76]. For sparse data sets, HB seems to capture more of the heterogeneity, while LCA may produce slightly less biased estimates [77].
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bensing J. Bridging the gap, the separate worlds of evidence-based medicine and patient-centered medicine. Patient Educ Couns. 2000;39:17–15. Bensing J. Bridging the gap, the separate worlds of evidence-based medicine and patient-centered medicine. Patient Educ Couns. 2000;39:17–15.
2.
go back to reference Lerer L. Pharmaceutical marketing segmentation in the age of the internet. Int J Med Mark 2. 2002;2(2):159–66.CrossRef Lerer L. Pharmaceutical marketing segmentation in the age of the internet. Int J Med Mark 2. 2002;2(2):159–66.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Bassi F. Latent class factor models for market segmentation: an application to pharmaceuticals. Stat Methods Appl. 2007;16:270–87.CrossRef Bassi F. Latent class factor models for market segmentation: an application to pharmaceuticals. Stat Methods Appl. 2007;16:270–87.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Vaughn S, Sarianne S. Examining physician segments. Pharm Represent. 2009;39(4):12–5. Vaughn S, Sarianne S. Examining physician segments. Pharm Represent. 2009;39(4):12–5.
6.
go back to reference Andreasen AR. Redesigning the marketing universe. Keynote address, World Marketing Summit, Dhaka, 2 Mar 2012. Andreasen AR. Redesigning the marketing universe. Keynote address, World Marketing Summit, Dhaka, 2 Mar 2012.
7.
go back to reference Levitt T. The marketing imagination. New York: The Free Press; 1983. Levitt T. The marketing imagination. New York: The Free Press; 1983.
8.
go back to reference Smith W. Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. J Mark. 1956;21:3–8.CrossRef Smith W. Product differentiation and market segmentation as alternative marketing strategies. J Mark. 1956;21:3–8.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Greengrove K. Needs-based segmentation: principles and practice. Int J Mark Res. 2002;44(4):405–21. Greengrove K. Needs-based segmentation: principles and practice. Int J Mark Res. 2002;44(4):405–21.
10.
go back to reference Ferrandiz J. The impact of generic goods in the pharmaceutical industry. Health Econ. 1999;8(7):599–612.PubMedCrossRef Ferrandiz J. The impact of generic goods in the pharmaceutical industry. Health Econ. 1999;8(7):599–612.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Cunningham C, Deal K, Chen Y. Adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis: a new patient-centered approach to the assessment of health service preferences. Patient. 2010;3(4):257–73.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef Cunningham C, Deal K, Chen Y. Adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis: a new patient-centered approach to the assessment of health service preferences. Patient. 2010;3(4):257–73.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Cunningham C, Deal K, Neville A, Miller H, Lohfeld L. Modeling the problem-based learning preferences of McMaster University undergraduate medical students using a discrete choice conjoint experiment. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2006;3(2):245–66.CrossRef Cunningham C, Deal K, Neville A, Miller H, Lohfeld L. Modeling the problem-based learning preferences of McMaster University undergraduate medical students using a discrete choice conjoint experiment. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2006;3(2):245–66.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Cunningham C, Vaillancourt T, Rimas H, Deal K, Cunningham L, Short K, Chen Y. Modeling the bullying prevention program preferences of educators: a discrete choice conjoint experiment. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2009;37(7):929–43. doi:10.1007/s10802-009-9324-2.PubMedCrossRef Cunningham C, Vaillancourt T, Rimas H, Deal K, Cunningham L, Short K, Chen Y. Modeling the bullying prevention program preferences of educators: a discrete choice conjoint experiment. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2009;37(7):929–43. doi:10.​1007/​s10802-009-9324-2.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Yin Y, Zhang X, Williams R, et al. LOGISMOS—Layered optimal graph image segmentation of multiple objects and surfaces: cartilage segmentation in the knee joint. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 2010;29(12):2023–37.CrossRef Yin Y, Zhang X, Williams R, et al. LOGISMOS—Layered optimal graph image segmentation of multiple objects and surfaces: cartilage segmentation in the knee joint. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 2010;29(12):2023–37.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Schaap M, van Walsum T, Neefjes L, et al. Robust shape regression for supervised vessel segmentation and its application to coronary segmentation in CTA. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 2010;30(11):1974–86.CrossRef Schaap M, van Walsum T, Neefjes L, et al. Robust shape regression for supervised vessel segmentation and its application to coronary segmentation in CTA. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 2010;30(11):1974–86.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Van Gerven MA, Jurgelenaite R, Taal BG, et al. Predicting carcinoid heart disease with noisy-threshold classifier. Artif Intell Med. 2007;40(1):45–55.PubMedCrossRef Van Gerven MA, Jurgelenaite R, Taal BG, et al. Predicting carcinoid heart disease with noisy-threshold classifier. Artif Intell Med. 2007;40(1):45–55.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Giuly RJ, Martone M, Ellisman M. Method: automatic segmentation of mitochondria utilizing patch classification, contour pair classification, and automatically seeded level sets. BMC Bioinform. 2012;13:29.CrossRef Giuly RJ, Martone M, Ellisman M. Method: automatic segmentation of mitochondria utilizing patch classification, contour pair classification, and automatically seeded level sets. BMC Bioinform. 2012;13:29.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Dolnicar S, Lazarevski K. Methodological reasons for the theory/practice divide in market segmentation. J Mark Manag. 2009;25(3–4):357–73.CrossRef Dolnicar S, Lazarevski K. Methodological reasons for the theory/practice divide in market segmentation. J Mark Manag. 2009;25(3–4):357–73.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Aldenderfer M, Blashfield R. Cluster analysis. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1984. Aldenderfer M, Blashfield R. Cluster analysis. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1984.
20.
go back to reference Everitt BS. Unresolved problems in cluster analysis. Biometrics. 1979;35:169–82.CrossRef Everitt BS. Unresolved problems in cluster analysis. Biometrics. 1979;35:169–82.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Aaker D. Developing business strategies. 5th ed. New York: Wiley; 1998. p. 47. Aaker D. Developing business strategies. 5th ed. New York: Wiley; 1998. p. 47.
22.
go back to reference Vermunt J. Latent class modeling with covariates: two improved three-step approaches. Polit Anal. 2010;18:450–69.CrossRef Vermunt J. Latent class modeling with covariates: two improved three-step approaches. Polit Anal. 2010;18:450–69.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Dolnicar S, Leisch F. Evaluation of structure and reproducibility of cluster solutions using the bootstrap. Market Lett. 2010;21:83–101.CrossRef Dolnicar S, Leisch F. Evaluation of structure and reproducibility of cluster solutions using the bootstrap. Market Lett. 2010;21:83–101.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Retzer J, Shan M. Cluster ensemble analysis and graphical depiction of cluster partitions. Proceedings of the 2007 Sawtooth Software Conference, Sequim (WA); 2007. Retzer J, Shan M. Cluster ensemble analysis and graphical depiction of cluster partitions. Proceedings of the 2007 Sawtooth Software Conference, Sequim (WA); 2007.
25.
go back to reference Williams G. Data mining with Rattle and R: the art of excavating data for knowledge discovery. New York: Springer Science+Business Media; 2011.CrossRef Williams G. Data mining with Rattle and R: the art of excavating data for knowledge discovery. New York: Springer Science+Business Media; 2011.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Orme B. Getting started with conjoint analysis: strategies for product design and pricing research. Madison: Research Publishers LLC: p. 65. Orme B. Getting started with conjoint analysis: strategies for product design and pricing research. Madison: Research Publishers LLC: p. 65.
27.
go back to reference Breiman L. Random forests. Mach Learn. 2001;45(5–3):2. Breiman L. Random forests. Mach Learn. 2001;45(5–3):2.
28.
go back to reference Arabie P, Hubert L. Cluster analysis in marketing research. In: Bagozzi R, editor. Advanced methods of marketing research, Cambridge: Blackwell; 1994. p. 160–189. Arabie P, Hubert L. Cluster analysis in marketing research. In: Bagozzi R, editor. Advanced methods of marketing research, Cambridge: Blackwell; 1994. p. 160–189.
30.
go back to reference Calinski T, Habarasz J. A dendrite method for cluster analysis. Commun Stat. 1974;3:1–17.CrossRef Calinski T, Habarasz J. A dendrite method for cluster analysis. Commun Stat. 1974;3:1–17.CrossRef
31.
32.
go back to reference Akaike, H. Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Csaki F, editors. Second international symposium on information theory. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado; 1973. p. 267–8. Akaike, H. Information theory as an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Csaki F, editors. Second international symposium on information theory. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado; 1973. p. 267–8.
33.
go back to reference Bozdogan H. Model selection and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC): the general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika. 1987;52:345–70.CrossRef Bozdogan H. Model selection and Akaike’s information criterion (AIC): the general theory and its analytical extensions. Psychometrika. 1987;52:345–70.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Sugiura N. Further analysis of the data by Akaike’s information criterion and the finite corrections. Commun Stat Theory Methods. 1978;A7:13–26.CrossRef Sugiura N. Further analysis of the data by Akaike’s information criterion and the finite corrections. Commun Stat Theory Methods. 1978;A7:13–26.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference Banfield JD, Raftery AE. Model-based gaussian and non-gaussian clustering. Biometrics. 1993;49:803–21.CrossRef Banfield JD, Raftery AE. Model-based gaussian and non-gaussian clustering. Biometrics. 1993;49:803–21.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Rand WM. Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods. J Am Stat Assoc. 1971;66:846–50.CrossRef Rand WM. Objective criteria for the evaluation of clustering methods. J Am Stat Assoc. 1971;66:846–50.CrossRef
37.
38.
go back to reference Morey LC, Agresti A. An adjustment to the rand statistic for chance agreement. Classif Soc Bull. 1981;5:9–10. Morey LC, Agresti A. An adjustment to the rand statistic for chance agreement. Classif Soc Bull. 1981;5:9–10.
39.
go back to reference Fowlkes EB, Mallows CL. A method for comparing two hierarchical clusterings. J Am Stat Assoc. 1983;78(383):553–69.CrossRef Fowlkes EB, Mallows CL. A method for comparing two hierarchical clusterings. J Am Stat Assoc. 1983;78(383):553–69.CrossRef
40.
go back to reference Hultsch L. Untersuchung zur Besiedlung einer Sprengfläche im Pockautal durch die Tiergruppen Heteroptera (Wanzen) und Auchenorrhyncha (Zikaden). Hultsch L. Untersuchung zur Besiedlung einer Sprengfläche im Pockautal durch die Tiergruppen Heteroptera (Wanzen) und Auchenorrhyncha (Zikaden).
41.
go back to reference Krieger AM, Green PE. A generalized Rand-index method for consensus clustering of separate partitions of the same data base. J Classif. 1999;16:63–89.CrossRef Krieger AM, Green PE. A generalized Rand-index method for consensus clustering of separate partitions of the same data base. J Classif. 1999;16:63–89.CrossRef
42.
go back to reference Zweig M, Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem. 1993;39(4):561–77.PubMed Zweig M, Campbell G. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem. 1993;39(4):561–77.PubMed
43.
go back to reference Vuk M, Curk T. ROC curve, lift chart and calibration plot. Metodoloski zvezki. 2006;3(1):89–108. Vuk M, Curk T. ROC curve, lift chart and calibration plot. Metodoloski zvezki. 2006;3(1):89–108.
44.
go back to reference Goodman LA. The analysis of systems of qualitative variables when some of the variables are unobservable. Part I: a modified latent structure approach. Am J Sociol. 1974;79:1179–259.CrossRef Goodman LA. The analysis of systems of qualitative variables when some of the variables are unobservable. Part I: a modified latent structure approach. Am J Sociol. 1974;79:1179–259.CrossRef
45.
go back to reference Magidson J, Vermunt JK. Latent class factor and cluster models, bi-plots and related graphical displays. Sociol Methodol. 2001;31:223–64.CrossRef Magidson J, Vermunt JK. Latent class factor and cluster models, bi-plots and related graphical displays. Sociol Methodol. 2001;31:223–64.CrossRef
46.
go back to reference The CBC Latent Class Technical Paper. Version 3. Sawtooth Software Technical Paper Series, 2004. The CBC Latent Class Technical Paper. Version 3. Sawtooth Software Technical Paper Series, 2004.
47.
go back to reference Latent Class v4.5, Sawtooth Software Inc., 26 Sep 2012. Latent Class v4.5, Sawtooth Software Inc., 26 Sep 2012.
48.
go back to reference Vermunt JK, Magidson J. Latent Gold Choice 4.0 user’s guide. Statistical Innovations; 2005. Vermunt JK, Magidson J. Latent Gold Choice 4.0 user’s guide. Statistical Innovations; 2005.
49.
go back to reference Allenby G, Arora N, Ginter J. On the heterogeneity of demand. J Market Res. 1998;35:384–9.CrossRef Allenby G, Arora N, Ginter J. On the heterogeneity of demand. J Market Res. 1998;35:384–9.CrossRef
50.
go back to reference Rossi P, Allenby G, McCullough R. Bayesian statistics and marketing. New York: Wiley; 2005.CrossRef Rossi P, Allenby G, McCullough R. Bayesian statistics and marketing. New York: Wiley; 2005.CrossRef
51.
go back to reference Revelt D, Train K. Mixed logit with repeated choices: households’ choices of appliance efficiency level. Rev Econ Stat. 1998;30(4):647–57.CrossRef Revelt D, Train K. Mixed logit with repeated choices: households’ choices of appliance efficiency level. Rev Econ Stat. 1998;30(4):647–57.CrossRef
52.
go back to reference Johnson FR, Mansfield C. Survey design and analytical strategies for better healthcare stated-choice studies. The Patient. 2008;1(4):299–307.PubMedCrossRef Johnson FR, Mansfield C. Survey design and analytical strategies for better healthcare stated-choice studies. The Patient. 2008;1(4):299–307.PubMedCrossRef
53.
go back to reference MacQueen JB. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. Vol. 1. University of California Press; 1967: p. 281–297. MacQueen JB. Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of 5th Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. Vol. 1. University of California Press; 1967: p. 281–297.
54.
go back to reference Witek E. Comparison of model-based clustering with heuristic clustering methods. Folia Oeconomica. 2011;255:191–7. Witek E. Comparison of model-based clustering with heuristic clustering methods. Folia Oeconomica. 2011;255:191–7.
55.
go back to reference Wang X, Qiu W, Zamar RH. CLUES: a non-parametric clustering method based on shrinking. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2007;52(1):286–98.CrossRef Wang X, Qiu W, Zamar RH. CLUES: a non-parametric clustering method based on shrinking. Comput Stat Data Anal. 2007;52(1):286–98.CrossRef
56.
go back to reference Chang F, Qiu W, Zamar RH, Lazarus R, Wang X. Clues: An R package for nonparametric clustering based on local shrinking. J Stat Softw. 2010;33:4. Chang F, Qiu W, Zamar RH, Lazarus R, Wang X. Clues: An R package for nonparametric clustering based on local shrinking. J Stat Softw. 2010;33:4.
57.
go back to reference Kaufman L, Rousseeuw PJ. Finding groups in data. New York: Wiley; 2005. Kaufman L, Rousseeuw PJ. Finding groups in data. New York: Wiley; 2005.
59.
go back to reference Magidson, J. SI-CHAID 4.0 user’s guide. Statistical Innovations; 2005. Magidson, J. SI-CHAID 4.0 user’s guide. Statistical Innovations; 2005.
60.
go back to reference Retzer J, Shan M. Cluster ensemble analysis and graphical depiction of cluster partitions. In: Proceedings of the 2007 Sawtooth Software Conference, Sequim (WA); 2007. Retzer J, Shan M. Cluster ensemble analysis and graphical depiction of cluster partitions. In: Proceedings of the 2007 Sawtooth Software Conference, Sequim (WA); 2007.
61.
go back to reference Strehl A, Ghosh J. Cluster ensembles: a knowledge reuse framework for combining multiple partitions. J Mach Learn Res. 2002;3:583–617. Strehl A, Ghosh J. Cluster ensembles: a knowledge reuse framework for combining multiple partitions. J Mach Learn Res. 2002;3:583–617.
62.
go back to reference Orme B, Johnson R. Improving K-means cluster analysis: ensemble analysis instead of highest reproducibility replicates. Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series; 2008. Orme B, Johnson R. Improving K-means cluster analysis: ensemble analysis instead of highest reproducibility replicates. Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series; 2008.
63.
go back to reference Arseneault L, Walsh E, Trzesniewski K, Newcombe R, Caspi A, Moffitt TE. Bullying victimization uniquely contributes to adjustment problems in young children: a nationally representative cohort study. Pediatrics. 2006;118(1):130–8. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-2388.PubMedCrossRef Arseneault L, Walsh E, Trzesniewski K, Newcombe R, Caspi A, Moffitt TE. Bullying victimization uniquely contributes to adjustment problems in young children: a nationally representative cohort study. Pediatrics. 2006;118(1):130–8. doi:10.​1542/​peds.​2005-2388.PubMedCrossRef
64.
go back to reference Arseneault L, Bowes L, Shakoor S. Bullying victimization in youths and mental health problems: ‘Much ado about nothing’? Psychol Med. 2010;40:717–29.PubMedCrossRef Arseneault L, Bowes L, Shakoor S. Bullying victimization in youths and mental health problems: ‘Much ado about nothing’? Psychol Med. 2010;40:717–29.PubMedCrossRef
67.
go back to reference 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.PubMedCrossRef 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.PubMedCrossRef
68.
go back to reference Chen C, Liaw A, Breiman L. Using random forest to learn imbalanced data. UC Berkeley: Department of Statistics; 2004. Chen C, Liaw A, Breiman L. Using random forest to learn imbalanced data. UC Berkeley: Department of Statistics; 2004.
69.
go back to reference Svetnik V, Liaw A, Tong C, et al. Random forest: a classification and regression tool for compound classification and QSAR modeling. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2003;43:1947–58.PubMedCrossRef Svetnik V, Liaw A, Tong C, et al. Random forest: a classification and regression tool for compound classification and QSAR modeling. J Chem Inf Comput Sci. 2003;43:1947–58.PubMedCrossRef
70.
go back to reference Liaw A, Wiener M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News. 2002;2(3):18–22. Liaw A, Wiener M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News. 2002;2(3):18–22.
71.
go back to reference Haley R. Benefit segmentation: a decision-oriented research tool. J Mark. 1968;32(3):30–5.CrossRef Haley R. Benefit segmentation: a decision-oriented research tool. J Mark. 1968;32(3):30–5.CrossRef
72.
go back to reference Zapert K, Spears D. Reengineering a US-based diabetes patient segmentation for Japan: lost in translation. Presented at 2011 Annual National Conference of the Pharmaceutical Marketing Research group; 2011. Zapert K, Spears D. Reengineering a US-based diabetes patient segmentation for Japan: lost in translation. Presented at 2011 Annual National Conference of the Pharmaceutical Marketing Research group; 2011.
73.
go back to reference Bogle A, Simpson SL, Mills TM. Segmentations that work. First Annual Meeting of the Pharmaceutical Marketing Research Group; 2007. Bogle A, Simpson SL, Mills TM. Segmentations that work. First Annual Meeting of the Pharmaceutical Marketing Research Group; 2007.
74.
go back to reference Ross C, Steward CA, Sinacore JM. The importance of patient preferences in the measurement of health care satisfaction. Med Care. 1993;31(12):1138–49.PubMedCrossRef Ross C, Steward CA, Sinacore JM. The importance of patient preferences in the measurement of health care satisfaction. Med Care. 1993;31(12):1138–49.PubMedCrossRef
75.
go back to reference Magidson J, Eagle T, Vermunt JK. New developments in latent class choice models. In: Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings; 2003: p. 89–112. Magidson J, Eagle T, Vermunt JK. New developments in latent class choice models. In: Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings; 2003: p. 89–112.
76.
go back to reference The CBC Latent Class Technical Paper. Version 3. Sawtooth Software Technical Paper Series; 2004. The CBC Latent Class Technical Paper. Version 3. Sawtooth Software Technical Paper Series; 2004.
77.
go back to reference McCullough PR. Comparing hierarchical Bayes and latent class choice: practical issues for sparse data sets. In: 2009 Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings, Delray Beach (FL); Mar 2009. McCullough PR. Comparing hierarchical Bayes and latent class choice: practical issues for sparse data sets. In: 2009 Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings, Delray Beach (FL); Mar 2009.
Metadata
Title
Segmenting Patients and Physicians Using Preferences from Discrete Choice Experiments
Author
Ken Deal
Publication date
01-03-2014
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research / Issue 1/2014
Print ISSN: 1178-1653
Electronic ISSN: 1178-1661
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-013-0037-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 1/2014 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.