Evidence Hub

Sensitivity of hypothetical purchase task indices when studying substance use: A systematic literature review

Zvorsky I, Nighbor TD, Kurti AN, DeSarno M, Naudé G, Reed DD, Higgins ST

Preventive medicine, 2019

117 citations

Abstract

Hypothetical Purchase Tasks (HPTs) simulate demand for a substance as a function of escalating price. HPTs are increasingly used to examine relationships between substance-related correlates and outcomes and demand typically characterized using a common battery of indices (Intensity, Omax, Pmax, Breakpoint, Elasticity). This review examines the relative sensitivity of the HPT indices. Reports were identified using the search term "purchase task" in PubMed and Web of Science. For inclusion, reports had to be original studies in English, examine relationships between HPT indices and substance-related correlates or outcomes, and appear in a peer-reviewed journal through December 2017. Indices were compared using effect sizes (Cohen's d) and the proportion of studies in which statistically significant relationships were observed. The search identified 1274 reports with 114 (9%) receiving full-text review and 82 (6%) meeting inclusion criteria. 41 reports examined alcohol, 34 examined cigarettes/nicotine products, and 10 examined other substances. Overall, statistically significant relationships between HPT indices and substance-related correlates and outcomes were most often reported for Intensity (88.61%, 70/79), followed by Omax (81.16%, 56/69), Elasticity (72.15%, 57/59), Breakpoint (62.12%, 41/66), and Pmax (48.08%; 25/52). The largest effect sizes were observed for Intensity (0.75 ± 0.04, CI 0.67-0.84) and Omax (0.64 ± 0.04, CI 0.56-0.71), followed by Elasticity (0.44 ±…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free