Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34267507›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2021

Patient and Neurologist Preferences in the United States for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Treatments: Findings from a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Jinender Kumar, M Janelle Cambron-Mellott, Tom Tencer, Oliver Will, deMauri S Mackie, Kathleen Beusterien

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Predictors of high- versus low-intensity first-line multiple sclerosis treatments.Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical
    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

6 authors.

Jinender KumarWorldwide Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8490-6317
M Janelle Cambron-MellottRWE Data and Analytics, Kantar Health, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0061-104X
Tom TencerWorldwide Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7539-664X
Oliver WillRWE Data and Analytics, Kantar Health, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6514-8298
deMauri S MackieRWE Data and Analytics, Kantar Health, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4941-1682
Kathleen BeusterienRWE Data and Analytics, Kantar Health, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7786-5422

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveRelapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) is a chronic inflammatory disease associated with central nervous system dysfunction and accelerated brain volume loss (BVL). There exists a paucity of research examining the importance of BVL to patients and neurologists and exploring whether such preferences may differ between these two groups. This study sought to evaluate the preferences of patients and neurologists for RRMS treatments by considering benefits and risks associated with novel and common disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). PATIENTS AND

methodsUS patients diagnosed with non-highly active RRMS and US-based neurologists completed an online cross-sectional survey. A discrete choice experiment was used to assess patient and neurologist treatment preferences, with neurologists considering preferences for patients with non-highly active RRMS. Respondents chose between two treatment profiles with seven attributes identified in qualitative research: 2-year disability progression; 1-year relapse rate; rate of BVL; and risks of gastrointestinal symptoms, flu-like symptoms, infection, and life-threatening events. Attribute-level weighted preferences were estimated using a hierarchical Bayesian model.

resultsAnalyses included 150 patients with non-highly active RRMS (mean age: 54 years) and 150 neurologists (65% in private practice). Among patients, the most important treatment attribute was reducing the rate of BVL, followed by reducing the risk of infection and risk of flu-like symptoms. In contrast, the most important treatment attribute among neurologists was reducing the risk of a life-threatening event, followed by slowing the rate of 2-year disability progression and risk of infection.

conclusionThe findings highlight differences in treatment preferences between US patients and neurologists for non-highly active RRMS. The importance placed by patients on slowing the rate of BVL makes this a key topic that should be covered in the shared decision-making process.

Indexed as

brain volume losspatient preferencesphysician preferencesrelapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

Identifiers

PMID34267507
PMCPMC8275192

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.