1,900 rated or chosen profiles from 190 respondents, in up to 5 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 6 attributes.
| Description | UK health professionals (Prolific health-professional sample and a Panelbase sample of GPs) compared pairs of hypothetical infection treatments varying success rate, side effect rate, type of treatment, administration route, patient attitude and infection severity, choosing which they would prefer to recommend and rating their likelihood of recommending each. 190 respondents, 5 tasks of 2 profiles. |
|---|---|
| Reference | McCammon, S., Makarovs, K., Banducci, S., & Gold, V. (2024). Factors of prescribing phage therapy among UK healthcare professionals: Evidence from conjoint experiment and interviews [Data set]. figshare. |
| Licence | CC BY 4.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25435894 |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 190 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 1,900 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 5 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 6 |
| Tasks with no profile chosen | 0 |
| Topic | health covid |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | product service |
| Country | GB |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Randomization restrictions | unknown |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Outcomes:
| choice | Which of the two treatments would you personally prefer to recommend to treat an infection, presuming they are both a suitable option for the patient? [choice, forced] |
|---|---|
| rating | On a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 indicates 'not at all likely' and 10 indicates 'very likely', what is your likelihood of recommending Treatment 1? (and, using the same scale, Treatment 2) [rating, 0 (not at all likely) to 10 (very likely)] |
attr_administration_routeattr_infection_severityattr_patient_attitudeattr_side_effect_rateattr_success_rateattr_type_of_treatmentattrpos_administration_routeattrpos_infection_severityattrpos_patient_attitudeattrpos_side_effect_rateattrpos_success_rateattrpos_type_of_treatmentchoicecov_birth_yearcov_ethnic_groupcov_gendercov_regioncov_sampleidprofileratingtask
The layout (one row per respondent, task and profile; choice/rating outcomes; attr_ columns holding each attribute level as displayed) is defined in the IRW conjoint standard. What the outcomes asked is under Design above.
Or load it directly in R or Python (both need a free Redivis account; the first call opens a browser to sign in):
# R
install.packages("remotes")
remotes::install_github("itemresponsewarehouse/Rpkg")
library(irw)
df <- irw_fetch("mccammon_2024_phage_therapy", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("mccammon_2024_phage_therapy", source="conj")
@misc{https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25435894,
doi = {10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.25435894},
url = {https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/_b_Health_Professionals_Evaluations_and_Use_of_Phage_Therapy_b_/25435894},
author = {Banducci, Susan and Makarovs, Kirils and Gold, Vicki and McCammon, Sophie},
keywords = {Political science not elsewhere classified, Sociology of health},
title = {<b>Health Professionals Evaluations and Use of Phage Therapy</b>},
publisher = {figshare},
year = {2024},
copyright = {Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International}
}
| IRW version | v584 |
|---|---|
| Redivis dataset | irw_conjoint_2 v1.4 |
| Redivis dataset DOI | 10.57761/hk97-wv30 |
| Manifest pin for this IRW version | v1.4 |
| Metadata source | irw_meta v44.0 |