Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34447905›Full record

ReviewMediterranean journal of rheumatology2021

A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiment Studies in Rheumatoid Arthritis Biological Medicines.

Saman Zartab, Shekoufeh Nikfar, Naeim Karimpour-Fard, Ahmadreza Jamshidi, Vida Varahrami, Ali Homayouni, Abbas Kebriaeezadeh

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mediterranean journal of rheumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Saman ZartabPharmaceutical Management & Economic Research Center and Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Shekoufeh NikfarPharmaceutical Management & Economic Research Center and Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Naeim Karimpour-FardPharmaceutical Management & Economic Research Center and Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ahmadreza JamshidiRheumatology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Vida VarahramiDepartment of Economics, School of Economics and Political Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.
Ali HomayouniPharmaceutical Management & Economic Research Center and Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Abbas KebriaeezadehPharmaceutical Management & Economic Research Center and Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Tehran University of Medical Sciences · IRShahid Beheshti University · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveRheumatoid arthritis is a chronic disease with various clinical characteristics. The introduction of biological drugs has enhanced the efficacy and increased diversity of treatment options. Considering the patients' preferences in decision-making about treatment can improve their adherence. A discrete choice experiment is a type of conjoint method that can elicit preferences in more realistic scenarios. This article reviewed discrete choice experiment (DCE) studies to extract which attributes and levels were included in surveys. In addition, we focused on the process of designing surveys and the method that they used. Method: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Ovid (Medline) and ProQuest were systematically searched in order to find studies that evaluated rheumatoid arthritis patients' preferences about biological medicines. Studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1/1/1990 and 12/31/2019 were included. The included studies were analyzed using a narrative synthesis method and descriptive statistics.

resultsA total of 7124 studies were initially found. After deleting irrelevant and duplicate studies, 15 studies were included. The most common attributes that were used in surveys were efficacy, adverse effect, route of administration, frequency of administration, and cost. Most studies used a literature review for developing attributes and levels. The median number of included attributes and levels were seven and three, respectively. Eight studies explained their experimental design while seven studies did not. Conditional logit and mixed logit were the most common methods for modeling reciprocally.

conclusionSeveral aspects of DCE studies investigating biological drugs in RA were assessed. Explaining the sample size, experimental design, and qualitative work for developing attributes can improve this type of study.

Indexed as

biological productsconjoint methoddiscrete choice experimentpatient preferenceRheumatoid arthritis

Identifiers

PMID34447905
PMCPMC8369269
OpenAlexW3176752063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.