ArticlePatient preference and adherence2018
Treatment preferences among Japanese women with dysmenorrhea: results from a discrete choice experiment study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Real-world treatment patterns in patients with dysmenorrhea in Japan: a retrospective database study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Understanding Preferences, Needs, and Expectations for Pharmaceutical Treatment of Symptomatic Uterine Fibroids Based on Surveys of Healthcare Providers and Patients.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Assessment of prevalence, knowledge and health-related practices of dysmenorrhea among Malaysian women in Kuala Lumpur: a cross-sectional survey.Annals of medicine · 2023Article
- The Impact of Dysmenorrhea on Quality of Life Among Spanish Female University Students.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo examine patient preferences for oral and intrauterine system treatments for dysmenorrhea in Japan. PATIENTS AND
methodsA discrete choice experiment was conducted to assess the willingness to accept trade-offs among hypothetical treatment profiles. An internet-based survey was administered to women 18-49 years of age who self-reported a dysmenorrhea diagnosis or experienced dysmenorrhea at least once in the past 6 months (N=309). Choice questions included pairs of treatments presented with different attributes: mode of administration, reduction in bleeding after 6 months, chance of symptoms becoming "improved", nausea, weight gain, irregular bleeding, and risk of venous thromboembolism. Relative importance (RI) estimates were computed.
resultsThe mean respondent age was 35.8 years (standard deviation =7.0), and 85 women (27.5%) reported that they had previously used hormonal therapy for dysmenorrhea. Treatment preference was most strongly associated with mode of administration (RI=49.8%), followed by chance of irregular bleeding (RI=17.3%). In contrast, treatment preference was most weakly associated with chance of weight gain (RI=2.4%) and reduction in bleeding after 6 months (RI=0.8%). Respondents preferred oral treatments: for twice-daily regimen, odds ratio (OR)=4.90; for once-daily fixed cyclic regimen, OR=4.20; and for once-daily flexible extended regimen, OR=2.44; whereas for intrauterine system, OR=0.02 (
conclusionMode of administration factored heavily in dysmenorrhea treatment preferences. Women of reproductive age preferred oral medication, especially twice-daily regimen and once-daily fixed cyclic regimen. Findings can potentially help to improve physician-patient communication and treatment decision making. Physicians should consider factors that can influence patient preference to optimize treatment acceptance and adherence.
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.