Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35109949›Full record

ArticleBJPsych open2022

Implementation of personalised medicine policies in mental healthcare: results from a stated preference study in the UK.

Alan J McMichael, Joseph P M Kane, Jonathan J Rolison, Francis A O'Neill, Marco Boeri, Frank Kee

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alan J McMichaelPhD, Health & Social Care Public Health Agency, Belfast, UK.
Joseph P M KanePhD, Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8479-9977
Jonathan J RolisonPhD, Department of Psychology, University of Essex, Essex, UK.
Francis A O'NeillMD, Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Marco BoeriPhD, Health Preference Assessment, RTI Health Solutions, and School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Frank KeeMD, Centre for Public Health, and UKCRC Centre of Excellence for Public Health Research (NI), Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
Queen's University Belfast · GBPublic Health Agency · GBUniversity of Essex · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublic support for the implementation of personalised medicine policies (PMPs) within routine care is important owing to the high financial costs involved and the potential for redirection of resources from other services.

aimsWe aimed to determine the attributes of a PMP most likely to elicit public support for implementation. We also aimed to determine whether such support differed between a depression PMP and one for cystic fibrosis.

methodIn a discrete-choice experiment, paired vignettes illustrating both the current model of care (CMoC) and a hypothetical PMP for either depression or cystic fibrosis were presented to a representative sample of the UK public (n = 2804). Each vignette integrated varying attributes, including anticipated therapeutic benefit over CMoC, and the annual cost to the taxpayer. Respondents were invited to express their preference for either the PMP or CMoC within each pair.

resultsThe financial cost was the most important attribute influencing public support for PMPs. Respondents favoured PMP implementation where it benefited a higher proportion of patients or was anticipated to be more effective than CMoC. A reduction in services for non-eligible patients reduced the likelihood of support for PMPs. Respondents were more willing to fund PMPs for cystic fibrosis than for depression.

conclusionsCost is a significant factor in the public's support for PMPs, but essential caveats, such as protection for services available to PMP-ineligible patients, may also apply. Further research should explore the factors contributing to condition-specific nuances in public support for PMPs.

Indexed as

discrete-choice experimentsEconomicspersonalised medicinepublic healthpublic preference

Identifiers

PMID35109949
PMCPMC8867892
OpenAlexW4210439401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.