Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32676996›Full record

ArticleThe patient2021

Designing Discrete Choice Experiments Using a Patient-Oriented Approach.

Magda Aguiar, Mark Harrison, Sarah Munro, Tiasha Burch, K Julia Kaal, Marie Hudson, Nick Bansback, Tracey-Lea Laba

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The patient, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Magda AguiarCollaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, 4625-2405 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada. magda.aguiar@ubc.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7966-6897
Mark HarrisonCollaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, 4625-2405 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada.
Sarah MunroCentre for Healthcare Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Tiasha BurchScleroderma Association of British Columbia, North Vancouver, BC, Canada.
K Julia KaalCollaboration for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, 4625-2405 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada.
Marie HudsonDivision of Experimental Medicine, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Nick BansbackCentre for Healthcare Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Tracey-Lea LabaCentre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation, University Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
University of British Columbia · CAMcGill University · CAUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient-oriented research is a process whereby patients or caregivers are included as research partners so that research focusses on topics that are priorities and lead to findings that translate into practice. Using a case study of preferences for stem cell transplant in scleroderma, we report on a patient-oriented research approach to developing a discrete choice experiment. Our patient-oriented research application followed the four guiding principles in Canada's Strategy for Patient-Oriented Research: inclusiveness, support, mutual respect and co-build. In this case study, patient partners were involved at different levels of engagement to match individual availability, skillset and roles in the team. They advised, to different degrees, on all aspects of the study from design to analyses. Using a patient-oriented research approach led to the inclusion of attributes that would likely have been excluded (e.g. support from a multidisciplinary team), and realistic framing of patient-relevant and sometimes sensitive attributes (e.g. mortality and cost). Meeting locations and times were adjusted to accommodate all-team circumstances. Institutional constraints on the reimbursement for patient partners influenced the timing and extent of involvement. We found that adopting a patient-oriented research approach to discrete choice experiment design injected unique knowledge and expertise into the team, improved the representativeness of the sample recruited, minimised researcher biases, and ensured appropriate attribute selection and descriptions. The patient-oriented research approach highlighted some constraints of discrete choice experiment designs and, while not a solution, might ensure the methodological trade-offs remain patient relevant. Institutional challenges must be addressed to progress patient-oriented health economics research.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorResearch DesignCaregiversHumansPatient PreferenceResearch Personnel

Identifiers

PMID32676996
OpenAlexW3043426758

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.