Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35585287›Full record

ArticleQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2022

Heterogeneity in preferences for outcomes of integrated care for persons with multiple chronic diseases: a latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment.

Maaike Hoedemakers, Milad Karimi, Marcel Jonker, Apostolos Tsiachristas, Maureen Rutten-van Mölken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

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

5 authors.

Maaike HoedemakersErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. hoedemakers@eshpm.eur.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9222-652X
Milad KarimiErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marcel JonkerErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Apostolos TsiachristasHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Maureen Rutten-van MölkenErasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Horizon 2020 634288
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeFor an integrated care programme to be successful, preferences of the stakeholders involved should be aligned. The aim of this study is to investigate to which extent outcomes beyond health are valued and to study the heterogeneity of preferences of those involved in integrated care.

methodsA discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted to elicit preferences for eight Triple Aim outcomes, i.e., physical functioning, psychological well-being, social relationships & participation, enjoyment of life, resilience, person-centeredness, continuity of care and total health and social care costs. Stakeholders were recruited among Dutch persons with multi-morbidity, informal caregivers, professionals, payers, and policymakers. A Bayesian mixed-logit model was used to analyse the data. Subsequently, a latent class analysis was performed to identify stakeholders with similar preferences.

results739 stakeholders completed the DCE. Enjoyment of life was perceived as the most important outcome (relative importance: 0.221) across stakeholders, while total health and social care costs were perceived as least important (0.063). The latent class analysis identified four classes. The first class (19.9%) put most weight on experience with care outcomes. The second class (39%) favoured enjoyment of life. The third class (18%) focused relatively more on physical health. The fourth class (24%) had the least consistent preferences.

conclusionThis study has highlighted the heterogeneity in views of stakeholders in integrated care on what is important in health(care) for persons with multi-morbidity. To accurately value integrated care a variety of outcomes beyond health-e.g., enjoyment of life and experience with care-should be taken into account.

Indexed as

Choice BehaviorDelivery of Health Care, IntegratedMultiple Chronic ConditionsBayes TheoremHumansLatent Class AnalysisPatient PreferenceStakeholder ParticipationSurveys and QuestionnairesDiscrete choice experimentIntegrated careLatent class analysisMulti-morbidityOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID35585287
PMCPMC9356934

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.