Trial reportThe Permanente journal2017
Improving Patient-Centered Care by Assessing Patient Preferences for Multiple Sclerosis Disease-Modifying Agents: A Stated-Choice Experiment.
Trial report in The Permanente journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Discrete-Choice Experiments and Conjoint Analysis Studies in People with Multiple Sclerosis.The patient · 2018Pooled it
- A Targeted Literature Search and Phenomenological Review of Perspectives of People with Multiple Sclerosis and Healthcare Professionals of the Immunology of Disease-Modifying Therapies.Neurology and therapy · 2022Review
- Patient-based benefit-risk assessment of medicines: development, refinement, and validation of a content search strategy to retrieve relevant studies.Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA · 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextLong-term adherence to pharmaceutical treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) is poor. A focus on patient preferences when determining the patient's therapeutic plan may improve this experience.
objectiveTo identify factors important to patients with MS when evaluating their options for pharmaceutical agents that deliver disease-modifying therapy.
designStated-choice experiment to a sample of patients with MS from privately and publicly insured enrollees in a regional health plan. The experiment presented each respondent with a set of 8 drug choices for MS, asking them to select their preferred disease-modifying agent (DMA). Each respondent was randomized to 1 of 6 possible sets of 8 drug choices, for a total of 48 drug pairings in the experiment. Each choice included 2 hypothetical DMAs and a "no drug" option. Drug attributes included dosage type and modality, efficacy, relapse risk, and drug side effects.
resultsThe "no drug" alternative was a stronger substitute than the alternative drug when the focal drug characteristics changed, and the most important drivers of choice were type of side effects and risk of severe relapse. DISCUSSION: The heterogeneity of our sample and the inclusion of a "no drug" alternative in the DMA choice scenarios make this study an important contribution to this body of literature. The importance of the "no drug" alternative in our results is consistent with poor long-term adherence to DMAs.
conclusionPatient-centered MS therapy using DMAs should include discussion of side effects and relapse risk.
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.