ArticleInternational journal of MS care
Preferences for Multiple Sclerosis Treatments: Using a Discrete-Choice Experiment to Examine Differences Across Subgroups of US Patients.
Article in International journal of MS care. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Attributes Influencing Preferences for Treatments and Interventions in People With Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS).Muscle & nerve · 2025Pooled it
- Access to specialist ataxia centres in Europe: cross-sectional surveys in the United Kingdom, Italy, and Germany.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Unveiling preferences in multiple sclerosis care: insights from an Italian discrete-choice experiment with patients and healthcare professionals.Journal of neurology · 2024Article
- Health-Related Quality of Life with Diroximel Fumarate in Patients with Relapsing Forms of Multiple Sclerosis: Findings from Qualitative Research Using Patient Interviews.Advances in therapy · 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
- Preventive drugs for Huntington's disease: A choice-based conjoint survey of patient preferences.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2022Article
- Hereditary angioedema patients would prefer newer-generation oral prophylaxis.Journal of drug assessment · 2021Article
- Patient and Neurologist Preferences in the United States for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Treatments: Findings from a Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2021Article
- Cladribine Tablets and Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: A Pragmatic, Narrative Review of What Physicians Need to Know.Neurology and therapy · 2020Review
- Patient and physician preferences for multiple sclerosis treatments in Germany: A discrete-choice experiment study.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
- Predictors of high- versus low-intensity first-line multiple sclerosis treatments.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinicalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe growing number of treatments for relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) provides opportunities to consider patient preferences in treatment decisions.
methodsWe designed a Web-based, discrete-choice experiment survey to analyze treatment preferences in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). The survey presented hypothetical MS treatments defined by six attributes: risk of MS progression, time between relapses, risk of serious infection, treatment-related flu-like symptoms and gastrointestinal symptoms, and route and frequency of administration. Preference weights estimated with random-parameters logit were used to calculate importance scores and preference shares among three pairs of subsamples.
resultsPatients with a self-reported physician diagnosis of RRMS (N = 301) completed the survey: 56% rated their disability level as normal or mild; 43% currently used a self-injectable treatment. Respondents with normal or mild disability levels placed greater weight on avoiding injections with flu-like symptoms and risk of progression, whereas patients with worse disability placed greater weight on reducing risk of progression and risk of serious infection. Patients taking injectables placed the most weight on risk of progression and risk of serious infection, whereas respondents not taking injectables placed the most weight on route and frequency of administration. Differences in preferences between subgroups were significant (P < .05). The presence of common adverse events associated with daily pills and injectables altered predicted preferences for route of administration.
conclusionsPreferences of patients with RRMS varied depending on current treatment and disability level, especially regarding mode of administration. Considering patient preferences for treatment features may lead to higher treatment satisfaction and adherence.
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.