Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31858340›Full record

ArticleClinical rheumatology2020

What do Australian patients with inflammatory arthritis value in treatment? A discrete choice experiment.

Kerrie-Anne Ho, Mustafa Acar, Andrea Puig, Gabor Hutas, Simon Fifer

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Kerrie-Anne HoCommunity and Patient Preference Research Pty Ltd, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2635-2568
Mustafa AcarOutcomes Research, Janssen-Cilag Pty Ltd, North Ryde, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9173-9956
Andrea PuigOutcomes Research, Janssen-Cilag Pty Ltd, North Ryde, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7730-6310
Gabor HutasOutcomes Research, Janssen-Cilag Pty Ltd, North Ryde, NSW, Australia.
Simon FiferCommunity and Patient Preference Research Pty Ltd, Sydney, NSW, Australia. simon.fifer@cappre.com.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5221-0067
EVRAZ (United Kingdom) · GBNew South Wales Department of Primary Industries · AU

Funding

Janssen-Cilag Pty Ltd -
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of treatment preferences in patients with inflammatory arthritis (IA) [rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA)] focussing on treatment attributes that patients' value, their relative importance, and the risk-benefit trade-offs that characterise patients' choices around treatment.

methodsA discrete choice experiment (DCE) approach was used. Attributes of interest were clinical efficacy; slowing of disease progression; risk of mild-moderate side effects; risk of severe side effects; frequency of administration; real-world product evidence; management of related conditions; and availability of a patient support programme. Using data from the DCE component, a restricted latent class model (LCM) was estimated to determine discrete 'classes' of treatment preferences.

resultsIn this analysis, 206 participants were included (AS n = 59; PsA n = 62; RA n = 85). Two classes were identified. For 'class 1' (59.9%), the most important attributes (across all treatment modalities) were preventing disease progression, clinical efficacy and risk of mild-to-moderate side effects. For 'class 2' (40.1%), clinical and non-clinical attributes were important, and attribute importance depended on treatment modality. Patient demographic and treatment characteristics did not predict class membership.

conclusionFor most patients with IA, clinical efficacy, stopping disease progression and risks of mild-to-moderate side effects are important treatment attributes. Patients with prior biologic DMARD experience had greater preference for injection treatments. For a subset of patients, patient support programmes and the frequency of administration were important. Clinicians should be mindful of preferences when prescribing treatment to patients with IA.Key Points• Most patients consider clinical efficacy, stopping disease progression and the risk of mild-to-moderate side effects as important treatment attributes• Patients with prior biologic DMARD experience have greater preference for injection treatments.• For a subset of patients, patient support programmes, and the frequency of administration were important.• Clinicians should be mindful of preferences when prescribing treatment to patients with IA.

Indexed as

Patient PreferenceAdultAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, PsoriaticArthritis, RheumatoidAustraliaBiological ProductsChoice BehaviorConfidence IntervalsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSpondylitis, AnkylosingAntirheumatic AgentsBiological ProductsInflammatory arthritisPatient preferenceTreatment attributes

Identifiers

PMID31858340
OpenAlexW2996739845

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.