Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30294713›Full record

ArticleJournal of patient-reported outcomes2018

Development of the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) and Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ).

Louis S Matza, Kristina S Boye, Katie D Stewart, Rosirene Paczkowski, Jessica Jordan, Lindsey T Murray

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of patient-reported outcomes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Exit Interviews Examining Patient Experiences with Tirzepatide and Dulaglutide for Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in the SURPASS-CVOT Trial.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Understanding data visualization techniques in qualitative studies used to develop and validate patient-reported outcome measures: a targeted literature review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Measure to Assess Emotional Impact of Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Patient Perceptions of and Preferences Between Characteristics of Injectable Diabetes Treatments.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Louis S MatzaPatient-Centered Research, Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA.
Kristina S Boye2Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN USA.
Katie D StewartPatient-Centered Research, Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA.
Rosirene Paczkowski2Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN USA.
Jessica JordanPatient-Centered Research, Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA.
Lindsey T MurrayPatient-Centered Research, Evidera, 7101 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 1400, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA.
Gramercy Research Group (United States) · USEli Lilly (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious research has examined patient perceptions of insulin injection devices. However, injectable medications other than insulin are increasingly used to treat type 2 diabetes, including GLP-1 receptor agonists. No patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments have been developed taking into account the experiences of patients using newer injection devices, which are often different from devices used for insulin. Therefore, the purpose of this qualitative study was to develop two draft PRO instruments focusing on patients' experiences with these newer injection devices (one instrument assessing perceptions of a single injection device, and another assessing preferences between two devices).

methodsQuestionnaire development proceeded in six steps: literature review, interviews with six device experts, concept elicitation interviews with patients (

resultsLiterature review and expert interviews were conducted to inform a concept elicitation interview guide. In concept elicitation in the US, UK, and Germany, patients with type 2 diabetes reported a range of injection features that influenced their perceptions of non-insulin injection devices (e.g., requirements for preparation of the medication/device, issues related to the needle, ease-of-use, portability). Two draft "item pools" were developed based on the literature review, expert interviews, and concept elicitation results. In cognitive interviews, patients recommended minor revisions and indicated that the draft instruments were generally clear, comprehensible, and relevant to their experience with non-insulin injectable medication. The instruments were refined based on the cognitive interviews and translatability assessment, resulting in two questionnaires.

conclusionsThe various steps of qualitative research support the content validity of these new PRO instruments, which are the first developed specifically to assess perceptions of non-insulin injection delivery systems. Despite some overlap with insulin-focused questionnaires, the new instruments are distinct from previous instruments (omitting content that would not be relevant to patients receiving non-insulin injectable treatment, while including content that is not included in the insulin focused instruments). This qualitative research yielded two draft questionnaires that are grounded in patient perceptions and ready for psychometric validation studies with larger samples of patients with type 2 diabetes.

Indexed as

Concept elicitationGLP-1 receptor agonistInjection devicePatient-reported outcomes measuresPROQualitative researchTreatment preferenceTreatment satisfactionType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID30294713
PMCPMC6153258
OpenAlexW2891499089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.