Heterogeneous D-Error Designs for Discrete Choice Experiments Using Prior Beliefs
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Rationale: Whilst recent applications have advanced the econometric modeling of discrete choice experiments (DCEs) in health care, little research has examined the statistical efficiency of their experimental design (ED). ED is a combinatorial problem of specifying the profiles of the choice sets. Statistically efficient provide as much information as possible on the model parameters, which enables a reduction in the number of respondents needed to achieve a given level of accuracy. DCEs in health typically focus on design criteria enforcing orthogonality, level balance, and minimum level overlap. For non-linear choice models, such criteria may not produce efficient designs, and claims of D-error efficiency assume the expected coefficients are zero. Assuming zero priors is conservative and possibly inappropriate. More efficient designs may be obtained using non-zero priors, the D-error criterion to summarize efficiency, and algorithms to search over the design space. Objective: To investigate the gains in statistical efficiency accrued from employing D-error heterogeneous designs using the mixed logit (MXL) behavioural model and non-zero prior coefficients. Methodology: The designs were structured around a DCE investigating preferences for diagnosing genetic causes of developmental delay. Three attributes were included: likelihood of genetic diagnosis, time waiting for results, and cost. The base design was constructed using orthogonal arrays, and 16 choice sets were generated using the foldover technique to ensure level balance and minimum level overlap; for non-demanders, an opt-out alternative was also included. To search for more efficient designs, choice sets were generated using two design algorithms - swapping and cycling - and the efficiency of each design was summarized using the D-error criterion. D-error is a scaled measure of the determinant of the Fisher Information Matrix (IM). Prior coefficients obtained from the pilot study were used to estimate the IM. Because these coefficients were based on a small sample, heterogeneous designs were constructed to help mitigate the potential effects of misspecified priors. The heterogeneous design approach produces several subdesigns to be administered across study participants, which allows for greater variability in the attribute levels. The theoretical gains from these procedures were evaluated using Monte Carlo analysis; real-world gains in efficiency were examined by directly evaluating the IM of the base design versus the heterogeneous design. The relative efficiency of the design approaches was derived as the ratio of the D-errors. Results: The homogeneous design with informative priors was expected to be 30% more efficient when compared to the base design. The heterogeneous approach with two subdesigns resulted in theoretical efficiency gains of 35% compared to the base; Monte Carlo analysis confirmed that the heterogeneous approach produced greater efficiency gains if the priors were misspecified. The real-world D-error statistics revealed the single and heterogeneous designs were respectively 19 and 23% more efficient than the base design. Conclusions: The statistical efficiency of the ED for the MXL specification can be improved using informative priors and the heterogeneous design approach. The degree of improvement, however, may be overestimated in theoretical applications because of issues such as complexity.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,171 | 0,337 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,014 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».