Skip to main content
. 2018 Nov 3;37(2):201–226. doi: 10.1007/s40273-018-0734-2

Table 5.

Details of validity checks and qualitative methods

Item Category 1990–2000 2001–2008 2009–2012 Current: 2013–2017
N = 34a (%)b N = 114a (%)b N = 179a (%)b N = 301a (%)b
External validity tested Yes 0 (0) 1 (1) 2 (1) 7 (2)
No 34 (100) 113 (99) 177 (99) 294 (98)
Internal validity tested Non-satiation (dominated questions) 15 (44) 56 (49) 36 (20) 50 (17)
Transitivity (a > b, b > c then c > a) 3 (9) 5 (4) 2 (1) 2 (1)
Sen’s expansion and contraction 0 (0) 2 (2) 2 (1) 2 (1)
Internal compensatory (1 attribute) 12 (35) 36 (32) 30 (17) 18 (6)
Other N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 102 (34)
Not clearly reported/not tested N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 189 (63)
Type of qualitative method used Interviews N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 151 (50)
Focus groups N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 54 (18)
Other N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 53 (18)
No qualitative method used N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 43 (14)
Rationale using qualitative methods Attribute selection 6 (18) 79 (69) 90 (50) 160 (53)
Level selection 6 (18) 38 (33) 73 (41) 134 (44)
Pre-testing questionnaire 16 (47) 36 (32) 73 (41) 113 (38)
Understanding results/responses 0 (0) 5 (4) 14 (8) 12 (4)
Not clearly reported/other N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C N/C 5 (2)

N/C not collected (data were not collected for this specific category)

aNumbers of individual studies might not add up to total Ns as some studies addressed multiple topics

bPercentages might not add up to 100% because some studies addressed multiple topics and because of rounding error