ReviewCurrent rheumatology reports2015
A Review of Patient Preferences for Osteoporosis Drug Treatment.
Review in Current rheumatology reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
29 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Bisphosphonate alternative regimens for the prevention of osteoporotic fragility fractures: BLAST-OFF, a mixed-methods study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Women's values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Pooled it
- Acceptability of bisphosphonates among patients, clinicians and managers: a systematic review and framework synthesis.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019Guideline
- Patients' Preferences for Outcome, Process and Cost Attributes in Cancer Treatment: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.The patient · 2017Pooled it
- Qianggu capsule for the treatment of primary osteoporosis: evidence from a Chinese patent medicine.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Estimating the Time to Benefit for Preventive Drugs with the Statistical Process Control Method: An Example with Alendronate.Drugs & aging · 2016Trial
- Using discrete choice experiment to investigate public preferences for osteoporosis community-level management strategies in China.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2026Article
- Deriving Drug Treatment Preference for Osteoporosis Patients Using Discrete Choice Experiments: A Scoping Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chinese patent medicines for the treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- A quasi-experimental study about shared decision-making and motivational interviewing on patients with a recent fracture attending Fracture Liaison Services.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent-adherence intervention in fracture liaison services.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2024Article
- Patient versus physician preferences for lipid-lowering drug therapy: A discrete choice experiment.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Determining patient preferences for the medical management of osteoporosis using conjoint analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024Article
- Patients as research partners in preference studies: learnings from IMI-PREFER.Research involvement and engagement · 2023Article
- Disease Burden and Treatment Preferences Amongst Postmenopausal Women with Severe Osteoporosis in Greece.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- Current situation of shared decision making in osteoporosis: A comprehensive literature review of patient decision aids and decision drivers.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Enhancing Public Participation in Public Health Offerings: Patient Preferences for Facilities in the Western Cape Province Using a Discrete Choice Experiment.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Poor medication adherence is a major problem in chronic diseases such as osteoporosis that may partially be due to unaddressed patient values and preferences. Data on patient preferences could help clinicians to improve medication adherence and could also be useful in policy decisions and guideline development. This paper aims to identify literature reporting on the preferences of patients for osteoporosis drug medications. Several methods have been used to elicit patient preferences for medications and their characteristics including qualitative research, survey with ranking/rating exercises, discrete-choice experiments and clinical studies (crossover designs, open-label study). All these studies revealed that osteoporotic patients have preferences for medications and their attributes, in particular for less-frequent dosing regimens. Interestingly, variations in the preferences of patients were observed in most studies, suggesting the importance to take into account individual preference in decision-making to improve osteoporosis care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.