ArticlePatient preference and adherence2015
Patients' and physicians' preferences for type 2 diabetes mellitus treatments in Spain and Portugal: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- Analysis of patients preferences in type 2 diabetes mellitus second-line drug treatment: A discrete choice experiment.PloS one · 2025Article
- Understanding patient cost-sharing thresholds for diabetes treatment attributes via a discrete choice experiment.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2023Review
- Identifying patient preferences for diabetes care: A protocol for implementing a discrete choice experiment in Samoa.PloS one · 2023Article
- Weight Change and the Association with Adherence and Persistence to Diabetes Therapy: A Narrative Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Review
- Dynamics of Patient-Based Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medicines in Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Review
- Preferences for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus for Medications in Shandong Province, China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
- Treatment-Related Attributes of Diabetes Therapies and How People with Type 2 Diabetes Report Their Impact on Indicators of Medication-Taking Behaviors.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Review
- Comparing the Preferences of Patients and the General Public for Treatment Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.The patient · 2021Article
- Patient Preferences for Diabetes Treatment Among People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Patient and physician preferences for type 2 diabetes medications: a systematic review.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2019Review
- Quantified patient preferences for lifestyle intervention programs for diabetes prevention-a protocol for a systematic review.Systematic reviews · 2018Article
- Clinical effectiveness of liraglutide vs basal insulin in a real-world setting: Evidence of improved glycaemic and weight control in obese people with type 2 diabetes.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2018 · on this mapArticle
- Scale Heterogeneity in Healthcare Discrete Choice Experiments: A Primer.The patient · 2018Article
- Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Treatment Attributes Important to Injection-Experienced Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Preference Study in Germany and the United Kingdom.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2017Article
- A Framework for Instrument Development of a Choice Experiment: An Application to Type 2 Diabetes.The patient · 2016Article
- Patient preferences for treatment of multiple sclerosis with disease-modifying therapies: a discrete choice experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2016Article
- Comparison of benefit-risk preferences of patients and physicians regarding cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors using discrete choice experiments.Patient preference and adherence · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess Spanish and Portuguese patients' and physicians' preferences regarding type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatments and the monthly willingness to pay (WTP) to gain benefits or avoid side effects.
methodsAn observational, multicenter, exploratory study focused on routine clinical practice in Spain and Portugal. Physicians were recruited from multiple hospitals and outpatient clinics, while patients were recruited from eleven centers operating in the public health care system in different autonomous communities in Spain and Portugal. Preferences were measured via a discrete choice experiment by rating multiple T2DM medication attributes. Data were analyzed using the conditional logit model.
resultsThree-hundred and thirty (n=330) patients (49.7% female; mean age 62.4 [SD: 10.3] years, mean T2DM duration 13.9 [8.2] years, mean body mass index 32.5 [6.8] kg/m(2), 41.8% received oral + injected medication, 40.3% received oral, and 17.6% injected treatments) and 221 physicians from Spain and Portugal (62% female; mean age 41.9 [SD: 10.5] years, 33.5% endocrinologists, 66.5% primary-care doctors) participated. Patients valued avoiding a gain in bodyweight of 3 kg/6 months (WTP: €68.14 [95% confidence interval: 54.55-85.08]) the most, followed by avoiding one hypoglycemic event/month (WTP: €54.80 [23.29-82.26]). Physicians valued avoiding one hypoglycemia/week (WTP: €287.18 [95% confidence interval: 160.31-1,387.21]) the most, followed by avoiding a 3 kg/6 months gain in bodyweight and decreasing cardiovascular risk (WTP: €166.87 [88.63-843.09] and €154.30 [98.13-434.19], respectively). Physicians and patients were willing to pay €125.92 (73.30-622.75) and €24.28 (18.41-30.31), respectively, to avoid a 1% increase in glycated hemoglobin, and €143.30 (73.39-543.62) and €42.74 (23.89-61.77) to avoid nausea.
conclusionBoth patients and physicians in Spain and Portugal are willing to pay for the health benefits associated with improved diabetes treatment, the most important being to avoid hypoglycemia and gaining weight. Decreased cardiovascular risk and weight reduction became the third most valued attributes for physicians and patients, respectively.
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.