ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2018
Patient preferences: a Trojan horse for evidence-based medicine?
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enablers and barriers to evidence implementation in complementary medicine: A systematic review.Integrative medicine research · 2022Review
- Preferences in a Group of Patients with Cancer: A Grounded Theory.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evidence-based medicine (EBM) movement has long acknowledged the relevance of patient preferences and values. According to EBM, clinicians first clarify the medical evidence about the benefits and burdens of the treatment in question and then, as a second step, elicit values and preferences from patients. Importantly, however, values are placed on patient-relevant outcomes. Surrogate endpoints are only used if their validity is proven. This article shows that some recent patient-preference studies attribute value to surrogate endpoints even when there is no improvement in patient-relevant outcomes. The article points out their foundation in neoclassical economics and discusses their clash with principles of EBM and medical ethics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28667449What 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.