ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2023
Diabetes patient preferences for glucose-monitoring technologies: results from a discrete choice experiment in Poland and the Netherlands.
Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Multi-Dimensional Barriers for Work Productivity and Possible Solutions to Overcome Presenteeism in Young-Onset Diabetes: A Mixed-Methods Study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Preferences of Pregnant Women and Healthcare Professionals on First-Trimester Ultrasound Screening for Fetal Anomalies: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Prenatal diagnosis · 2026Article
- Cost-Utility Analysis of FreeStyle Libre Systems in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus on Treatment with Basal Insulin and Poor Glycemic Control in Spain.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026Article
- Patient preferences for pancreatic cancer treatment (PERSEUS): a multicenter discrete choice experiment.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2025Article
- What Do Patients Prefer in Periodontal and Implant Therapy? A Scoping Review.Journal of periodontal research · 2025Article
- Important Continuous Glucose Monitoring Attributes for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2025Article
- The practical operation and consequences of glucose measurement by pilots with diabetes.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Article
- Research Priorities to Increase Confidence in and Acceptance of Health Preference Research: What Questions Should be Prioritized Now?The patient · 2024Article
- Article
- Evaluating Preferences of Hospitalized Diabetes Patients for Hospital-Wide Glycemic Control Programme: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Journal of diabetes research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNew glucose-monitoring technologies have different cost-benefit profiles compared with traditional finger-prick tests, resulting in a preference-sensitive situation for patients. This study aimed to assess the relative value adults with diabetes assign to device attributes in two countries. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsAdults with type 1 or 2 diabetes from the Netherlands (n=226) and Poland (n=261) completed an online discrete choice experiment. Respondents choose between hypothetical glucose monitors described using seven attributes: precision, effort to check, number of finger pricks required, risk of skin irritation, information provided, alarm function and out-of-pocket costs. Panel mixed logit models were used to determine attribute relative importance and to calculate expected uptake rates and willingness to pay (WTP).
resultsThe most important attribute for both countries was monthly out-of-pocket costs. Polish respondents were more likely than Dutch respondents to choose a glucose-monitoring device over a standard finger prick and had higher WTP for a device. Dutch respondents had higher WTP for device improvements in an effort to check and reduce the number of finger pricks a device requires.
conclusionCosts are the primary concern of patients in both countries when choosing a glucose monitor and would likely hamper real-world uptake. The costs-benefit profiles of such devices should be critically reviewed.
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.