Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31413548›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2019

Preferences of patients with rheumatoid arthritis regarding disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a discrete choice experiment.

Milou van Heuckelum, Elke Ge Mathijssen, Marcia Vervloet, Annelies Boonen, Renske Cf Hebing, Annelieke Pasma, Harald E Vonkeman, Mark H Wenink, Bart Jf van den Bemt, Liset van Dijk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 17 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Milou van HeuckelumDepartment of Pharmacy, Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Elke Ge MathijssenDepartment of Rheumatology, Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Marcia VervloetNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research) , Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Annelies BoonenCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Renske Cf HebingDepartment of Rheumatology, Reade , Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Annelieke PasmaDepartment of Rheumatology, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Harald E VonkemanDepartment of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands.
Mark H WeninkDepartment of Rheumatology, Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Bart Jf van den BemtDepartment of Pharmacy, Sint Maartenskliniek, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Liset van DijkNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research) , Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLSint Maartenskliniek · NLErasmus University Rotterdam · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLMedisch Spectrum Twente · NLNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLReade · NLUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough patients have different treatment preferences, these individual preferences could often be grouped in subgroups with shared preferences. Knowledge of these subgroups as well as factors associated with subgroup membership supports health care professionals in the understanding of what matters to patients in clinical decision-making.

objectivesTo identify subgroups of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) based on their shared preferences toward disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and to identify factors associated with subgroup membership.

methodsA discrete choice experiment to determine DMARD preferences of adult patients with RA was designed based on a literature review, expert recommendations, and focus groups. In this multicenter study, patients were asked to state their preferred choice between two different hypothetical treatment options, described by seven DMARD characteristics with three levels within each characteristic. Latent class analyses and multinomial logistic regressions were used to identify subgroups and the characteristics (patient characteristics, disease-related variables, and beliefs about medicines) associated with subgroup membership.

resultsAmong 325 participating patients with RA, three subgroups were identified: an administration-driven subgroup (45.6%), a benefit-driven subgroup (29.7%), and a balanced subgroup (24.7%). Patients who were currently using biologic DMARDs were significantly more likely to belong to the balanced subgroup than the administration-driven subgroup (relative risk ratio (RRR): 0.50, 95% CI: 0.28-0.89). Highly educated patients were significantly more likely to belong to the benefit-driven subgroup than the balanced subgroup (RRR: 11.4, 95% CI: 0.97-133.6). Patients' medication-related concerns did not contribute significantly to subgroup membership, whereas a near-significant association was found between patients' beliefs about medication necessity and their membership of the benefit-driven subgroup (RRR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.00-1.23).

conclusionThree subgroups with shared preferences were identified. Only biologic DMARD use and educational level were associated with subgroup membership. Integrating patient's medication preferences in pharmacotherapy decisions may improve the quality of decisions and possibly medication adherence.

Indexed as

discrete choice experimentdisease-modifying antirheumatic drugsrheumatoid arthritistreatment preferences

Identifiers

PMID31413548
PMCPMC6660639
OpenAlexW2963333516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.