SynthesisBMC medical informatics and decision making2019
Opportunities and challenges for the inclusion of patient preferences in the medical product life cycle: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Understanding Patient Preferences for Medication Process Attributes: A Systematic Literature Review.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- Patient Preferences Regarding Menopausal Symptoms and Treatments: A Systematic Review of Quantitative Stated-Preference Studies.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- Proposal for capturing patient experience through extended value frameworks of health technologies.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2021Pooled it
- The Impact of Video-Based Educational Materials with Voiceovers on Preferences for Glucose Monitoring Technology in Patients with Diabetes: A Randomised Study.The patient · 2023Trial
- Do preferences differ based on respondent experience of a health issue and its treatment? A case study using a public health intervention.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Trial
- Preferences towards digital health technologies: a scoping review.Health economics review · 2026Review
- Article
- Global research on patient involvement in health technology assessment: a bibliometric analysis.Global health research and policy · 2025Article
- Evolution of reported patient and public involvement over time in randomised controlled trials in major medical journals and in their protocols: meta-epidemiological evaluation.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability.The patient · 2025Review
- Preferences for gene therapy in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: insights from patient and caregiver interviews and attribute development.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Older adults' preferences for features of medication adherence technologies: a preference elicitation study.BMC digital health · 2025Article
- Exploring Patient Preference Information in Clinical Research and Decision Models: An Investigative Survey.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Heart failure patients' perspectives on treatment outcomes and unmet medical needs: A qualitative preference study.ESC heart failure · 2024Article
- HTA community perspectives on the use of patient preference information: lessons learned from a survey with members of HTA bodies.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Review
- Research Priorities to Increase Confidence in and Acceptance of Health Preference Research: What Questions Should be Prioritized Now?The patient · 2024Article
- Patient Preferences for Treatment in Relapsed/Refractory Acute Leukemia in the United Kingdom: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- Leveraging patient experience data to guide medicines development, regulation, access decisions and clinical care in the EU.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Existing Meditation and Breathing Devices for Stress Reduction and Their Incorporated Stimuli: A Systematic Literature Review and Competition Analysis.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Digital health · 2023Review
- What are the Unmet Needs and Most Relevant Treatment Outcomes According to Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease? A Qualitative Patient Preference Study.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe inclusion of patient preferences (PP) in the medical product life cycle is a topic of growing interest to stakeholders such as academics, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) bodies, reimbursement agencies, industry, patients, physicians and regulators. This review aimed to understand the potential roles, reasons for using PP and the expectations, concerns and requirements associated with PP in industry processes, regulatory benefit-risk assessment (BRA) and marketing authorization (MA), and HTA and reimbursement decision-making.
methodsA systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature published between January 2011 and March 2018 was performed. Consulted databases were EconLit, Embase, Guidelines International Network, PsycINFO and PubMed. A two-step strategy was used to select literature. Literature was analyzed using NVivo (QSR international).
resultsFrom 1015 initially identified documents, 72 were included. Most were written from an academic perspective (61%) and focused on PP in BRA/MA and/or HTA/reimbursement (73%). Using PP to improve understanding of patients' valuations of treatment outcomes, patients' benefit-risk trade-offs and preference heterogeneity were roles identified in all three decision-making contexts. Reasons for using PP relate to the unique insights and position of patients and the positive effect of including PP on the quality of the decision-making process. Concerns shared across decision-making contexts included methodological questions concerning the validity, reliability and cognitive burden of preference methods. In order to use PP, general, operational and quality requirements were identified, including recognition of the importance of PP and ensuring patient understanding in PP studies.
conclusionsDespite the array of opportunities and added value of using PP throughout the different steps of the MPLC identified in this review, their inclusion in decision-making is hampered by methodological challenges and lack of specific guidance on how to tackle these challenges when undertaking PP studies. To support the development of such guidance, more best practice PP studies and PP studies investigating the methodological issues identified in this review are critically needed.
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.