ArticleACR open rheumatology2020
Examining Treatment Decision-Making Among Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis: Insights From a Conjoint Analysis Survey.
Article in ACR open rheumatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis refractory to biologic therapy: 2-year clinical and radiographic results from the open-label extension of the SELECT-AXIS 2 study.Arthritis research & therapy · 2024Trial
- Efficacy and safety of upadacitinib for active ankylosing spondylitis refractory to biological therapy: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2022Trial
- Patients' Perspectives Regarding Ankylosing Spondylitis Treatment Administration Features: Evidence from Qualitative Interviews and a Multinational Quantitative Preference Survey.Rheumatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Management of Specific Clinical Profiles in Axial Spondyloarthritis: An Expert's Document Based on a Systematic Literature Review and Extended Delphi Process.Rheumatology and therapy · 2023Article
- Conjoint Analysis: A Research Method to Study Patients' Preferences and Personalize Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Australian Consensus Statements for the Assessment and Management of Non-radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis.Rheumatology and therapy · 2022Article
- Treatment Satisfaction and Decision-making from the Patient Perspective in Axial Spondyloarthritis: Real-World Data from a Descriptive Cross-sectional Survey Study from the ArthritisPower Registry.ACR open rheumatology · 2022Article
- Determining patient treatment preferences for management of acute pain episodes in irritable bowel syndrome.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 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
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe number of therapies for axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is increasing. Thus, it has become more challenging for patients and physicians to navigate the risk-benefit profiles of the various treatment options. In this study, we used conjoint analysis-a form of trade-off analysis that elucidates how people make complex decisions by balancing competing factors-to examine patient decision-making surrounding medication options for axSpA.
methodsWe conducted an adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis survey for patients with axSpA to assess the relative importance of medication attributes (eg, chance of symptom improvement, risk of side effects, route of administration, etc) in their decision-making. We also performed logistic regression to explore whether patient demographics and disease characteristics predicted decision-making.
resultsOverall, 397 patients with axSpA completed the conjoint analysis survey. Patients prioritized medication efficacy (importance score 26.8%), cost (26.3%), and route of administration (13.9%) as most important in their decision-making. These were followed by risk of lymphoma (9.5%), dosing frequency (7.2%), risk of serious infection (6.0%), tolerability of side effects (5.3%), and clinic visit and laboratory test frequency (4.8%). In regression analyses, there were few significant associations between patients' treatment preferences and sociodemographic and axSpA characteristics.
conclusionsTreatment decision-making in axSpA is highly individualized, and demographics and baseline disease characteristics are poor predictors of individual preferences. This calls for the development of online shared decision-making tools for patients and providers, with the goal of selecting a treatment that is consistent with patients' preferences.
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.