Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25914530›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2015

Patient preferences in severe COPD and asthma: a comprehensive literature review.

Basil G Bereza, Anders Troelsgaard Nielsen, Sverrir Valgardsson, Michiel E H Hemels, Thomas R Einarson

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The epidemiology of noncommunicable respiratory disease in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, and North Africa.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2017
    Review
  18. Review
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Basil G BerezaLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, ON, Canada.
Anders Troelsgaard NielsenJanssen A/S, Birkerød, Denmark.
Sverrir ValgardssonJanssen-Cilag A/S, Oslo, Norway.
Michiel E H HemelsJanssen A/S, Birkerød, Denmark.
Thomas R EinarsonLeslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, ON, Canada.
Janssen (Belgium) · BEUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundManagement of chronic incurable diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma is difficult. Incorporation of patient preferences is widely encouraged. PURPOSE: To summarize original research articles determining patient preference in moderate-to-severe disease.

methodsAcceptable articles consisted of original research determining preferences for any aspect of care in patients with COPD/asthma. The target population included those with severe disease; however, articles were accepted if they separated outcomes by severity or if the majority had at least moderate-to-severe disease. We also accepted simulation research based on scenarios describing situations involving moderate-to-severe disease that elicited preferences. Two reviewers searched Medline and Embase for articles published from the date of inception of the databases until the end of November 2014, with differences resolved through consensus discussion. Data were tabulated and analyzed descriptively.

resultsAbout 478 articles identified, 448 were rejected and 30 analyzed. There were 25 on COPD and five on asthma. Themes identified as most important in COPD were symptom relief (dyspnea/breathlessness), a positive patient-physician relationship, quality-of-life impairments, and information availability. Patients strongly preferred sponsors' inhalers. At end-of-life, 69% preferred receiving CPR, 70% wanted noninvasive, and 58% invasive mechanical intervention. While patients with asthma preferred treatments that increased symptom-free days, they were willing to trade days without symptoms for a reduction in adverse events and greater convenience. Asthma patients were willing to pay for waking up once and not needing their inhaler over waking up once overnight and needing their inhaler.

conclusionFew studies have examined patient preference in these diseases. More research is needed to fill in knowledge gaps.

Indexed as

Patient PreferenceAccess to InformationActivities of Daily LivingAdministration, InhalationAnti-Asthmatic AgentsAsthmaBronchodilator AgentsCost of IllnessHumansLungNebulizers and VaporizersPhysician-Patient RelationsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveQuality of LifeSeverity of Illness IndexTerminal CareAnti-Asthmatic AgentsBronchodilator Agentsautonomyconvenienceend-of-life caresatisfactionwillingness-to-pay

Identifiers

PMID25914530
PMCPMC4399696
OpenAlexW2057623743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.