ArticleThe patient2017
Patient Preferences for Pain Management in Advanced Cancer: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in The patient, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Practices for Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Pooled it
- Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022Pooled it
- Preferences for home-based care services during China's long-term care market transition: evidence from a discrete choice experiment.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Urban-rural differences in preferences for traditional Chinese medicine services among chronic disease patients: a discrete choice experiment.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2024Article
- Patient and public involvement in cancer research: A scoping review.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Dynamics of Patient-Based Benefit-Risk Assessment of Medicines in Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Review
- Evaluation of Factors Relevant to Pain Control Among Patients After Surgical Treatment.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Article
- Patient Treatment Preferences for Heart Failure Medications: A Mixed Methods Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- Incorporating Quantitative Patient Preference Data into Healthcare Decision Making Processes: Is HTA Falling Behind?The patient · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPain from advanced cancer remains prevalent, severe and often under-treated.
aimThe aim of this study was to conduct a discrete choice experiment with patients to understand their preferences for pain management services and inform service development.
methodsFocus groups were used to develop the attributes and levels of the discrete choice experiment. The attributes were: waiting time, type of healthcare professional, out-of-pocket costs, side-effect control, quality of communication, quality of information and pain control. Patients completed the discrete choice experiment along with clinical and health-related quality of life questions. Conditional and mixed logit models were used to analyse the data.
resultsPatients with cancer pain (n = 221) and within palliative care services completed the survey (45% were female, mean age 64.6 years; age range 21-92 years). The most important aspects of pain management were: good pain control, zero out-of-pocket costs and good side-effect control. Poor or moderate pain control and £30 costs drew the highest negative preferences. Respondents preferred control of side effects and provision of better information and communication, over access to certain healthcare professionals. Those with lower health-related quality of life were less willing to wait for treatment and willing to incur higher costs. The presence of a carer influenced preferences.
conclusionsOutcome attributes were more important than process attributes but the latter were still valued. Thus, supporting self-management, for example by providing better information on pain may be a worthwhile endeavour. However, service provision may need to account for individual characteristics given the heterogeneity in preferences.
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.