We compared a standard and a marginal approach with explicit ranking in the context of a study assessing preferences for different types of out-of-hours and emergency care in France. Preferences for six major service types (or ‘actors’) were elicited. 280 people representative of the French adult population were interviewed, of whom 140 received the marginal version and 140 received the standard version. The results suggest that the marginal approach provides a ranking of options more in line with explicit ranking, with only two options not being significantly different in the explicit ranking exercise and in the marginal approach. Overall, the standard approach is reasonably consistent with explicit ranking but does not perform as well as the marginal approach and proves unable to differentiate between the five most preferred actors. We used the results in a cost-benefit analysis, thus providing one of the first economic evaluations in the area of out-of-hours and emergency care. Our findings suggest that the marginal approach provides results that can be used in priority setting contexts.
LAMIRAUD, K. and DONALDSON, C. (2012). Marginal Versus Standard WTP: An Application to Out-of-Hours and Emergency Care in France. In: 3rd Joint CES/HESG Workshop.