Background: A new modelling approach for analysing data from discrete-choice experiments (DCEs) has been recently developed in transport economics based on the notion of regret minimization-driven choice behaviour. This so-called Random Regret Minimization (RRM) approach forms an alternative to the dominant Random Utility Maximization (RUM) approach. The RRM approach is able to model semi-compensatory choice behaviour and compromise effects, while being as parsimonious and formally tractable as the RUM approach.
Objectives: Our objectives were to introduce the RRM modelling approach to healthcare-related decisions, and to investigate its usefulness in this domain.
Methods: Using data from DCEs aimed at determining valuations of attributes of osteoporosis drug treatments and human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations, we empirically compared RRM models, RUM models and Hybrid RUM-RRM models in terms of goodness of fit, parameter ratios and predicted choice probabilities.
Results: In terms of model fit, the RRM model did not outperform the RUM model significantly in the case of the osteoporosis DCE data (p = 0.21), whereas in the case of the HPV DCE data, the Hybrid RUM-RRM model outperformed the RUM model (p < 0.05). Differences in predicted choice probabilities between RUM models and (Hybrid RUM-) RRM models were small. Derived parameter ratios did not differ significantly between model types, but trade-offs between attributes implied by the two models can vary substantially.
Conclusion: Differences in model fit between RUM, RRM and Hybrid RUM-RRM were found to be small. Although our study did not show significant differences in parameter ratios, the RRM and Hybrid RUM-RRM models did feature considerable differences in terms of the trade-offs implied by these ratios. In combination, our results suggest that RRM and Hybrid RUM-RRM modelling approach hold the potential of offering new and policy-relevant insights for health researchers and policy makers.