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

CriteriaA: Early developmentB: Early developmentC: Late phase IIID: Post-marketing
Cost12.3810.36  
Sample Size11.7612.91 14.01
Study duration (time needed)12.1013.18 14.36
Low frequency of sessions5.454.21
A low cognitive load on patients8.214.35
Quick sessions with participants2.04
Complexity of instructions to participants3.78 
Group dynamic with participants1.95
No interaction between participants (Solitarily exercise)3.80
Ease to which new attributes can be added without making prior results invalid2.912.752.92
Estimating weights for attributes4.603.596.454.04
Estimating trade-offs between attributes5.486.189.315.98
8 or more attributes can be explored1.89
Degree to which internal validation methods can be incorporated7.168.8712.897.57
Degree to which external validity is established10.158.0011.7211.62
Exploring the reasons behind a preference in qualitative detail8.009.016.094.91
Public acknowledgement by your organisation as an acceptable method to study preferences6.154.27
Quantifying heterogeneity in preferences6.946.6213.29.02
Calculating of risk attitudes (like risk tolerance vs. risk aversion) due to uncertainty in the value of an attribute4.874.188.366.85