ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2017
Factors Associated with Patient Preferences for Disease-Modifying Therapies in Multiple Sclerosis.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Novel Fully Automated Deep Learning Model for Coronary Artery Calcification Detection on Computed Tomography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Preferences of Patients and Cardiologists Regarding Pacemaker Characteristics in Spain: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
- Patient and healthcare provider experience of diroximel fumarate: considerations for selecting disease-modifying therapy.Neurodegenerative disease management · 2025Article
- Perspective of Disease and Treatment in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis: A Polish Multi-center Study.Neurology and therapy · 2025Article
- Cyclodextrin Complexes for Clinical Translatability: Applications for Cladribine and Retrometabolically Designed Estredox.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Access, satisfaction, adherence and safety to subcutaneous natalizumab compared to intravenous natalizumab in multiple sclerosis in a real-life cohort: first report from Latin America.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2025Article
- Unveiling preferences in multiple sclerosis care: insights from an Italian discrete-choice experiment with patients and healthcare professionals.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Costs of Potential Medication Wastage Due to Switching Treatment Among People With Multiple Sclerosis.Journal of health economics and outcomes research · 2024Article
- Persistence, Adherence, and Switching to Higher-Cost Therapy in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Initiating Oral Disease-Modifying Therapies: A Retrospective Real-World Study.Neurology and therapy · 2022Article
- 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
- Low-dose rituximab should be used for treating MS in resource-limited settings: Yes.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2022Article
- 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
- Economics of Multiple Sclerosis Disease-Modifying Therapies in the USA.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2021Review
- Hereditary angioedema patients would prefer newer-generation oral prophylaxis.Journal of drug assessment · 2021Article
- Health economics of disease-modifying therapy for multiple sclerosis in the United States.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2021Review
- Medication adherence/persistence among patients with active multiple sclerosis in Finland.Acta neurologica Scandinavica · 2020Article
- Article
- Utilization Patterns of Oral Disease-Modifying Drugs in Commercially Insured Patients with Multiple Sclerosis.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2019Article
- Oral Disease-Modifying Treatments for Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis: A Likelihood to Achieve No Evidence of Disease Activity or Harm Analysis.CNS drugs · 2018Article
- "I Will Respect the Autonomy of My Patient": A Scoping Review of Shared Decision Making in Multiple Sclerosis.International journal of MS careArticle
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
backgroundTreatment adherence in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) is essential to reduce the rate of acute neurological attacks, severity of relapses, and hospitalizations and to slow its progression. Adherence rates in MS patients have been shown to be affected by multiple factors, including physical or cognitive difficulties, perceived lack of treatment efficacy, treatment-related adverse events, injection anxiety, and frequency of administration.
objectiveTo elicit the preferences of MS patients for noneconomic and economic attributes of current disease-modifying therapies (DMTs).
methodsWe used conjoint analysis to estimate preferences from a convenience sample through a web-based online survey. Patients were invited to participate in the study using web portals and newsletters for MS patients. The conjoint survey included the following 6 attributes: (1) overall efficacy based on autoimmune disease progression stabilization; (2) acute increase in disease activity (flare-up); (3) rate of respiratory tract infections; (4) rate of serious respiratory tract infections (leading to hospitalization); (5) medication use; and (6) patient monthly out-of-pocket medication costs. Using a fractional factorial design, 24 product profiles were created. Each respondent reviewed a random selection of 8 profiles. With each profile, subjects were asked to indicate their likelihood to try the hypothetical products on a scale from 0 to 100. Random effects linear regression was used to elicit preferences.
resultsAfter exclusion of respondents with incomplete information, data from 129 subjects were included in the analysis. The overall relative importance of each attribute for the ranges presented were (1) 38.4% for monthly out-of-pocket cost; (2) 21.5% for route and frequency of administration; (3) 15.9% for risk of hospitalization by infection; (4) 11.9% for risk of respiratory tract infection; (5) 7.4% for risk of flare-ups; and (6) 5.0% for disease progression stabilization. Preference weights indicated that subjects favored subcutaneous (beta coefficient [β] = -2.26, 95% CI = -4.22 to -0.22) and oral administration (β = 7.93, 95% CI = 5.95 to 10.2) over intramuscular (β = -5.67, 95% CI = -8.67 to -3.56), but no significant differences were found between subcutaneous over intramuscular administration. Monthly out-of-pocket cost was the most influential attribute, with an overall relative importance of 38%. The most preferred level was $75 (β = 12.85, 95% CI = 10.64 to 15.06) followed by $150 (β = 3.41, 95% CI = 0.98 to 5.84) when compared between $75, $150, $300, and $450 a month.
conclusionsConjoint analysis proved to be a convenient tool to quantify respondents' relative preferences for DMT characteristics. Respondents gave higher weight to DMT monthly out-of-pocket costs and mode of administration than to adverse effects or efficacy. These findings may assist in the development of DMT cost-sharing strategies and shared decision making at the point of care. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest. Study concept and design were contributed by Hincapie and Burns. Data were collected by Hincapie and Burns, and interpreted by all the authors. The manuscript was written by Hincapie, Penm, and Burns and revised by Penm, Hincapie, and Burns. At the time of data collection, Burns was a PhD candidate at The University of Oklahoma, College of Pharmacy.
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.