Summary of concordance analysis and resulting conclusions
| Author conclusion | ||||
| Method used | N (%) | Evidence of concordance, N (%) | Evidence of disagreement, N (%) | Mixed, N (%) |
| Qualitative comparison | ||||
| Strength of coefficients | 19 (50%) | 2 (11%) | 3 (16%) | 14 (74%) |
| MRS | 6 (16%) | – | 3 (50%) | 3 (50%) |
| Relative importance | 2 (5%) | – | – | 2 (100%) |
| Weighting | 1 (3%) | – | – | 1 (100%) |
| Difference | 2 (5%) | – | 1 (50%) | 1 (50%) |
| Statistical tests | ||||
| Similarity | 2 (5%) | – | – | 2 (100%) |
| Unpaired differences | 1 (3%) | – | – | 1 (100%) |
| Pooled regression | 2 (5%) | – | 2 (100%) | – |
| Regression diagnostics | ||||
| Wald test/interactions | 5 (13%) | – | 2 (40%) | 3 (60%) |
| Chow | 1 (3%) | 1 (100%) | – | – |
| Swait and Louviere test | 3 (8%) | 1 (33%) | 1 (33%) | 1 (33%) |
MRS, marginal rate of substitution.