ArticleThe patient2022
Improvements to Survey Design from Pilot Testing a Discrete-Choice Experiment of the Preferences of Persons Living with HIV for Long-Acting Antiretroviral Therapies.
Article in The patient, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preferences of People Living with HIV for Long-Acting Antiretroviral Treatment in Germany: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2023Pooled it
- Incorporating the Patient Voice into Attribute and Level Selection for a Preference Study: A Qualitative Study in Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.The patient · 2026Article
- Heterogeneity of patient preferences for long-acting HIV treatment among people with HIV in Kenya.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Article
- Delay, Doubt and Dollars: Exploring Delay and Probability Discounting of Free and Paid HIV Vaccines among Sexual and Gender Minorities.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Patient preferences for long-acting antiretroviral treatment among people with HIV in Kenya: a discrete choice experiment.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Patient preferences for long-acting HIV treatment: a preference heterogeneity assessment.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Key informant views on potential acceptability and feasibility of long-acting antiretroviral treatment for HIV in Kenya.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Pretesting Discrete-Choice Experiments: A Guide for Researchers.The patient · 2024Article
- U.S. patient preferences for long-acting HIV treatment: a discrete choice experiment.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Article
- A mixed-methods study exploring women's perceptions and recommendations for a pregnancy app with monitoring tools.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Preferences in the Design and Delivery of Neurodevelopmental Follow-Up Care for Children: A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveDevelopment of clear and effective discrete-choice experiment surveys is an important step toward ensuring accurate and usable preference results. Pretest interviews and pilot testing are common in the development of discrete-choice experiments, and it is important for researchers to report details of survey changes resulting from patient feedback elicited in pilot work. This paper details pilot testing of an online discrete-choice experiment to elicit preferences for long-acting antiretroviral therapies among patients with HIV.
methodsThe survey included an introduction to hypothetical treatment options, descriptions of attributes, comprehension questions, instructions for completing a discrete-choice experiment, a discrete-choice experiment with 17 choice tasks, and questions about personal characteristics. We piloted the survey with 50 respondents over ten waves. Each wave incorporated design improvements based on observations made during the previous wave. Respondents completed the online survey while screen sharing with a researcher, allowing interactive discussion. We developed a scheme for assessing and categorizing the survey changes.
resultsChanges to the pilot were categorized by ways they impacted aspects of the discrete-choice experiment or the likely quality of resulting data. The four categories of impact are: understanding of attributes, underlying discrete-choice experiment and understanding of the choice question, collection of individual characteristics hypothesized to affect preference, and changes that improved clarity and usability of the survey without directly affecting the other categories (e.g., survey navigation and instructional clarity, formatting changes).
conclusionsDetailed attention to the respondent experience in this large pilot allowed survey improvements that will likely reduce ambiguity, ensure more accurate capture of patient preferences and, ultimately, improve product development for long-acting antiretroviral therapies.
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.