Skip to main content
Log in

Measuring consumer preferences for ambulatory medical care arrangements

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes how conjoint analysis can be applied to health care marketing. Data from a sample of 73 university students were used to estimate part-worth values for different levels of attributes of ambulatory care arrangements. A high degree of comparative validity was found.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. MacStravic, R.,Marketing Health Care Services Aspen System, Germantown, Maryland, 1978.

  2. Acito, F., and Jain, A., Evaluation of conjoint analysis results: A comparison of methods.J. Mkt. Res. 17:106–112, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cattin, P., and Wittink, D. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: A survey. Research paper, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business, 1981.

  4. Roghmann, K., et al., Who chooses prepaid medical care: Survey results from two marketings of three new prepayment plans.Public Health Rep. 90:516–527, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Berki, S., Ashcraft, M., Penchansky, R., and Fortus, R., Enrollment choice in a multi-HMO setting: The roles of health risk, financial vulnerability, and access to care.Med. Care, 15:95–114, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gaus, C., Who enrolls in a prepaid group practice: The Columbia experience.Johns Hopkins Med. J. 128:9–14, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gross, P., Economics of health facility location.Int. J. Health Services 2:63–84, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Juba, D., Lave, J., and Shaddy, J., An analysis of the choice of health benefits plans.Inquiry 17:62–71, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Tessler, R., and Mechanic, D., Factors affecting the choice between prepaid group practice and alternative insurance programs.Milbank Memorial Fund Q. 53:149–172, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Green, P., and Wind, Y.,Multiattribute Decisions in Marketing: A Measurement Approach, The Dryden Press, Hinsdale, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lancaster, K., A new approach to consumer theory.J. Polit. Econ. 74:132–157, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dawes, R., and Corrigan, B., Linear models in decision making.Psychol. Bull. 81:95–106, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Green, P., and Devita, M., The robustness of linear models under correlated attribute conditions.1975 Educators' Conference American Marketing Association, Chicago, 1975, pp. 108–111.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Green, P., and Srinivasan, V., Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook.J. Consumer Res. 5:103–123, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Adelman, S., Orthogonal main-effect plans for asymmetrical factorial experiments.Technometrics (February) 25–31, 1962.

  16. Green, P., On the analyses of interactions in marketing research data.J. Mkt. Res. 10:410–421, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cattin, P., and Wittink, D., A Monte-Carlo study of metric and non-metric estimation methods for multiattribute models. Research Paper No. 341, Stanford University, 1976.

  18. Carmone, F., Green, P., and Jain, A., The robustness of conjoint analysis.J. Mkt. Res. 15:110–122, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Newhouse, J.,The Economics of Medical Care Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rosko, M.D., Walker, L.R., McKenna, W. et al. Measuring consumer preferences for ambulatory medical care arrangements. J Med Syst 7, 545–554 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00995184

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00995184

Keywords

Navigation