Loading...
Physical activity preferences of people living with brain injury : Formative qualitative research to develop a discrete choice experiment
Haynes, Abby Howard, Kirsten Johnson, Liam Williams, Gavin Clanchy, Kelly Tweedy, Sean Scheinberg, Adam Chagpar, Sakina Wang, Belinda Vassallo, Gabrielle
Haynes, Abby
Howard, Kirsten
Johnson, Liam
Williams, Gavin
Clanchy, Kelly
Tweedy, Sean
Scheinberg, Adam
Chagpar, Sakina
Wang, Belinda
Vassallo, Gabrielle
Abstract
Background and Objective
The World Health Organization physical activity guidelines for people living with disability do not consider the needs of people living with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury. This paper describes the qualitative co-development of a discrete choice experiment survey to inform the adaption of these guidelines by identifying the physical activity preferences of people living with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury in Australia.
Methods
The research team comprised researchers, people with lived experience of traumatic brain injury and health professionals with expertise in traumatic brain injury. We followed a four-stage process: (1) identification of key constructs and initial expression of attributes, (2) critique and refinement of attributes, (3) prioritisation of attributes and refinement of levels and (4) testing and refining language, format and comprehensibility. Data collection included deliberative dialogue, focus groups and think-aloud interviews with 22 purposively sampled people living with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury. Strategies were used to support inclusive participation. Analysis employed qualitative description and framework methods.
Results
This formative process resulted in discarding, merging, renaming and reconceptualising attributes and levels. Attributes were reduced from an initial list of 17 to six: (1) Type of activity, (2) Out-of-pocket cost, (3) Travel time, (4) Who with, (5) Facilitated by and (6) Accessibility of setting. Confusing terminology and cumbersome features of the survey instrument were also revised. Challenges included purposive recruitment, reducing diverse stakeholder views to a few attributes, finding the right language and navigating the complexity of discrete choice experiment scenarios.
Conclusions
This formative co-development process significantly improved the relevance and comprehensibility of the discrete choice experiment survey tool. This process may be applicable in other discrete choice experiment studies.
Keywords
Date
2023
Type
Journal article
Journal
Patient
Book
Volume
16
Issue
4
Page Range
385-398
Article Number
ACU Department
School of Behavioural and Health Sciences
Faculty of Health Sciences
Faculty of Health Sciences
Relation URI
Source URL
Event URL
Open Access Status
Published as ‘gold’ (paid) open access
License
CC BY-NC 4.0
File Access
Open