ArticlePatient preference and adherence2021
Opportunities and Challenges of Web-Based and Remotely Administered Surveys for Patient Preference Studies in a Vulnerable Population.
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 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Smartphone App-Based Survey Deployment Patterns and Longitudinal Response Rate: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Awareness and perceptions of systemic inflammation in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease: The SPARK-CVD China survey.Atherosclerosis plus · 2026Article
- Online sexual health survey implementation: Practical lessons from a comparative, mixed-methods analysis of 30 countries.PloS one · 2026Article
- Primary health care assessment in Brazil: conception and methodology of the 2024 National Basic Health Unit Census.Cadernos de saude publica · 2026Article
- Assessing Mental Health Literacy Among Undergraduate Nursing Students in South Africa.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Article
- State of the "Art" in Precision Health Symptom Science Research.Seminars in oncology nursing · 2025Review
- An Overview of Data Collection in Health Preference Research.The patient · 2025Review
- Population Recruitment Strategies in the Age of Bots: Insights from the What Is on Your Plate Study.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Article
- Disease Burden and Treatment-Seeking Behaviour of Adults with Atopic Dermatitis in Singapore: An Online Cross-Sectional Survey.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Article
- Comparing Discrete Choice Experiment with Swing Weighting to Estimate Attribute Relative Importance: A Case Study in Lung Cancer Patient Preferences.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2024Article
- Evolving migraine management: Lithuania's telemedicine experience.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
- Balancing benefits and risks in lung cancer therapies: patient preferences for lung cancer treatment alternatives.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Development of Japanese Cancer Intelligence Quotient to Measure Cancer Literacy and Knowledge among Japanese Laypersons.JMA journal · 2022Article
- Measuring Clients' Satisfaction and Trust in Community Health Workers: Results From a Cross-Sectional Survey.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
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 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The application of web-based and remotely administered surveys is becoming increasingly popular due to the fact that it offers numerous advantages over traditional paper-based or computer-based surveys completed in the presence of the researcher. However, it is unclear whether complex preference elicitation tasks administered online in highly vulnerable patient populations are also feasible. This commentary discusses opportunities and challenges of conducting quantitative patient preference studies in lung cancer patients using web-based modes of data collection. We refer to our recent experience in the context of the Patient Preference in Benefit-Risk Assessments during the Drug Life Cycle (PREFER) project. Among the main advantages were the possibility of reaching a wider and geographically distant population in a shorter timeframe while reducing the financial costs of testing, the greater flexibility offered and the reduced burden on the patients. Some limitations were also identified and should be the object of further research, including the potential lack of inclusiveness of the research, the lack of control over who is completing the survey, a poor comprehension of the study material, and ultimately a lower level of engagement with the study. Despite these limitations, experience from the PREFER project suggests that online quantitative methods for data collection may provide a valuable method to explore preferences in vulnerable patient populations beyond the COVID-19 pandemic.
Indexed as
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.