Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21050469›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2010

Preferences of diabetes patients and physicians: a feasibility study to identify the key indicators for appraisal of health care values.

Franz Porzsolt, Johannes Clouth, Marc Deutschmann, Hans-J Hippler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Understanding drug preferences, different perspectives.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Physician preferences for extra-glycemic effects of type 2 diabetes treatments.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2013
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Franz PorzsoltClinial Economics, University of Ulm, 89073 Ulm, Germany. franz.porzsolt@uniklinik-ulm.de
Johannes Clouth
Marc Deutschmann
Hans-J Hippler

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence-based medicine, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), support the inclusion of patients' preferences in health care decisions. In fact there are not many trials which include an assessment of patient's preferences. The aim of this study is to demonstrate that preferences of physicians and of patients can be assessed and that this information may be helpful for medical decision making.

methodOne of the established methods for assessment of preferences is the conjoint analysis. Conjoint analysis, in combination with a computer assisted telephone interview (CATI), was used to collect data from 827 diabetes patients and 60 physicians, which describe the preferences expressed as levels of four factors in the management and outcome of the disease. The first factor described the main treatment effect (reduction of elevated HbA1c, improved well-being, absence of side effects, and no limitations of daily life). The second factor described the effect on the body weight (gain, no change, reduction). The third factor analyzed the mode of application (linked to meals or flexible application). The fourth factor addressed the type of product (original brand or generic product). Utility values were scaled and normalized in a way that the sum of utility points across all levels is equal to the number of attributes (factors) times 100.

resultsThe preference weights confirm that the reduction of body weight is at least as important for patients--especially obese patients--and physicians as the reduction of an elevated HbA1c. Original products were preferred by patients while general practitioners preferred generic products.

conclusionUsing the example of diabetes, the difference between patients' and physicians' preferences can be assessed. The use of a conjoint analysis in combination with CATI seems to be an effective approach for generation of data which are needed for policy and medical decision making in health care.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementEndocrinologyGeneral PracticeAdolescentAdultAgedAttitude of Health PersonnelComputer-Aided DesignDiabetes MellitusFeasibility StudiesFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Preference

Identifiers

PMID21050469
PMCPMC2989314

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.