ArticlePatient preference and adherence2019
From drug-delivery device to disease management tool: a study of preferences for enhanced features in next-generation self-injection devices.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Analyzing the impact of subcutaneous injection needle, device, and administration characteristics on patient pain, anxiety, and safety: a systematic literature review.Drug delivery · 2026Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Current Practices for Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Pooled it
- Single-Injection Options for Administering a 320 mg Dose of Bimekizumab: 2 mL Safety Syringe and Auto-injector.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Article
- The Adherence and Outcomes Benefits of Using a Connected, Reusable Auto-Injector for Self-Injecting Biologics: A Narrative Review.Advances in therapy · 2023Review
- Design Development of the SMARTCLICAdvances in therapy · 2023Article
- Exploring patient preference heterogeneity for pharmacological treatments for chronic pain: A latent class analysis.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2022Article
- Patient Preference for Self-Injection Devices in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Discrete Choice Experiment in China.Patient preference and adherence · 2022Article
- Digital Health Integration Assessment and Maturity of the United States Biopharmaceutical Industry: Forces Driving the Next Generation of Connected Autoinjectable Devices.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo quantify rheumatology patient preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for features differentiating enhanced from standard self-injection devices and to investigate differences among subgroups. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) were recruited in the UK. A discrete-choice experiment was used to elicit preferences; respondents were presented with 10 choices between 3 different devices: a free standard disposable device, and 2 hypothetical reusable devices characterized by presence/absence of skin sensor, injection speed control, on-screen instructions, injection reminders, electronic log, and large grip. Every hypothetical device included a cost component to assess WTP for each enhanced feature. A random-parameters logit model was used to estimate preference weights and WTP.
resultsData were collected from 323 respondents by electronic survey (15/11/2017-15/02/2018; RA: 108; PsA: 103; axSpA: 112). On average, the skin sensor was the most preferred feature (£30), followed by injection speed control, injection reminders, electronic log (~£20 each), on-screen instructions (~£12), and a device with a small, rather than large grip (~£7). Similar preferences for attributes were observed across condition subgroups except for grip size: axSpA patients preferred small grip (~£27); PsA patients preferred large grip (~£19). Overall, respondents preferred reusable devices with all enhanced features (WTP value: £85) over the standard device. RA patients exhibited a higher WTP (£145) than PsA (£102) or axSpA (£62) for the same enhanced device.
conclusionPatients positively valued reusable self-injection devices with enhanced features, which may improve patient experience, potentially improving treatment adherence, clinical, and economic outcomes.
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.