Skip to main content

Table 4 Criteria weights (%) for each Scenario (A-D) determined from the AHP

From: Appraising patient preference methods for decision-making in the medical product lifecycle: an empirical comparison

Criteria

A: Early development

B: Early development

C: Late phase III

D: Post-marketing

Cost

12.38

10.36

  

Sample Size

11.76

12.91

 

14.01

Study duration (time needed)

12.10

13.18

 

14.36

Low frequency of sessions

5.45

4.21

A low cognitive load on patients

8.21

4.35

Quick sessions with participants

2.04

Complexity of instructions to participants

3.78

 

Group dynamic with participants

1.95

No interaction between participants (Solitarily exercise)

3.80

Ease to which new attributes can be added without making prior results invalid

2.91

2.75

2.92

Estimating weights for attributes

4.60

3.59

6.45

4.04

Estimating trade-offs between attributes

5.48

6.18

9.31

5.98

8 or more attributes can be explored

1.89

Degree to which internal validation methods can be incorporated

7.16

8.87

12.89

7.57

Degree to which external validity is established

10.15

8.00

11.72

11.62

Exploring the reasons behind a preference in qualitative detail

8.00

9.01

6.09

4.91

Public acknowledgement by your organisation as an acceptable method to study preferences

6.15

4.27

Quantifying heterogeneity in preferences

6.94

6.62

13.2

9.02

Calculating of risk attitudes (like risk tolerance vs. risk aversion) due to uncertainty in the value of an attribute

4.87

4.18

8.36

6.85