Objectives: To use the means-end chain (MEC) decision-making approach to compare two groups of participants using natural health products (NHPs) with and without scientific evidence support.
Methods: The laddering technique was used to interview 25 participants with osteoarthritis. Hierarchical value maps were generated to depict the decision-making processes. Semi-structured questions probed the role of scientific evidence in the decision-making process and content analysis identified thematic similarities and differences between the two groups.
Results: The dominant decision-making chain between participants in the two scientific evidence categories was similar. Scientific evidence is an important decision-making factor but not as important as the advice from health care providers, friends and family.
Conclusions: The MEC-approach and its associated laddering methodology helped us understand how people make decisions about NHPs. There were essentially no differences in how consumers in our two groups incorporated scientific evidence into their choice of NHPs for OA.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:TORONTO/oai:tspace.library.utoronto.ca:1807/31615 |
| Date | 02 January 2012 |
| Creators | Tsui, Teresa |
| Contributors | Boon, Heather |
| Source Sets | University of Toronto |
| Language | en_ca |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds