Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32190823›Full record

ArticleJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2020

Assessing physician preferences on future therapeutic options and diagnostic practices in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis.

Nigel Cook, Andreas Geier, Andreas Schmid, Gideon Hirschfield, Achim Kautz, Jörn M Schattenberg, Maria-Magdalena Balp

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Nigel CookNovartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Andreas GeierDivision of Hepatology, University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Andreas SchmidHealth Management, School of Law and Economics, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.
Gideon HirschfieldToronto Centre for Liver Disease, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Achim KautzLeberhilfe Projekt gUG, Dülken Straße 9, 51143 Köln, Germany.
Jörn M SchattenbergMetabolic Liver Research Program, I. Department of Medicine, University Medical Center Mainz, Langenbeckstrasse 1, 55116 Mainz, Germany.
Maria-Magdalena BalpNovartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Novartis (Switzerland) · CHJohannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEUniversitätsklinikum Würzburg · DEUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of Bayreuth · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

aimsThere is currently no data on physician preferences regarding future therapies for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH); this study explores these preferences and characteristics that are relevant to physician decision-making when choosing a potential therapy for a patient with NASH. The results were compared with those from a similar patient preference survey which was conducted in parallel.

methodInitial exploratory 30-minute telephone interviews were conducted to inform the design of a 15-minute quantitative online specialist physicians survey, containing direct questions and a preference survey. This was based on a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment to assess the relative importance of different treatment characteristics (attributes), followed by several paired comparison questions to understand the preference for 5 hypothetical product profiles.

resultsThe answers come from 121 physicians from Canada (n = 31), Germany (n = 30), the UK (n = 30) and the USA (n = 30). The primary driving element in NASH treatment decision-making was efficacy (49.23%), defined as "[hypothetical product] impact on liver status" and "[slowing of] progression to cirrhosis". Physicians reported the common use of non-invasive NASH diagnostic tests and 81% reported performing liver biopsy. In 57% of cases, physicians reported that "concerns related to the available diagnostic methods" limit the number of patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH.

conclusionsThis first physician preference study reveals that efficacy will be the main driver for physicians in selecting future NASH drugs. The findings also confirm the widespread use of non-invasive diagnostic tests and the reluctance to perform confirmatory liver biopsy despite guideline recommendations, mainly due to limited therapeutic options and patient refusal. LAY SUMMARY: This study explores physician preferences in relation to future therapies for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and characteristics that are relevant to physician decision-making when choosing a potential therapy for a patient with NASH. The results of a short online survey completed by 121 specialist physicians determined that the primary factor that influences treatment decision-making is efficacy, and that a wide range of non-invasive techniques are used to diagnose NASH, while confirmatory liver biopsy is not performed by all physicians despite guideline recommendations.

Indexed as

ACBC, adaptive choice-based conjointBest-worst scalingBWS, best-worst scalingGPs, general practitionersHb1Ac, glycated haemoglobinHB, hierarchical BayesianHTA, health technology assessmentliver biopsyliver diseaseNAFLDNASHNASH, non-alcoholic steatohepatitisnon-alcoholic fatty liver diseaseNon-invasive diagnosticsPCPs, primary care physiciansSC, steering committeetype 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID32190823
PMCPMC7068123
OpenAlexW3003672419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.