ArticlePatient preference and adherence2024
Toenail Onychomycosis with or without Diabetes in Canada: Patient Treatment Preferences and Health State Utilities.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Onychomycosis in special populations.Future microbiology · 2025Review
- Retrospective study of onychomycosis patients treated with ciclopirox 8% HPCH and oral antifungals applying artificial intelligence to electronic health records.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Toenail onychomycosis affects approximately 6.7% of Canadians. Symptoms include nail discolouration/disfiguration and pain; psychosocial impacts contribute to reduced health-related quality-of-life. Comorbid diabetes increases the risk of complications and exacerbates burden. Treatment may include topical therapy and/or oral agents. Purpose: To understand toenail onychomycosis treatment preferences, and to quantify the impact of toenail onychomycosis, with or without diabetes, on patient well-being. Methods: Adults living in Canada with self-reported, physician-diagnosed, toenail onychomycosis were recruited online. A discrete choice experiment was used to quantify treatment preferences. Scenarios were randomized; data were analyzed using conditional logit regression. Health state utilities were estimated using the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 Results: Three-hundred thirteen participants with toenail onychomycosis were included (161 had comorbid diabetes; 61.3%, severe onychomycosis). The mean age was 57.7 years; 55.9% were male. Treatment attributes with statistically significant impacts on patient preferences were efficacy (odds ratio [OR],1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.05 per 1% increased treatment success), administration method (one pill versus topical nail lacquer reference, 1.14; 1.04-1.26; topical solution applicator versus reference: 1.15; 1.03-1.29), severe adverse events (0.85; 0.80-0.90 per 1% increased risk), and risk of potential pharmacodynamic (0.80; 0.76-0.85) and alcohol (0.93; 0.88-0.98) interactions; preferences were more pronounced for efficacy and avoiding severe adverse events among toenail onychomycosis patients with comorbid diabetes. The mean (95% CI) utility value was 0.73 (0.70-0.75) overall, and statistically significantly lower (p=0.02) for toenail onychomycosis patients with diabetes (0.70; CI, 0.66-0.73) than those without (0.76; CI, 0.72-0.79). Conclusion: Among patients with toenail onychomycosis, the presence of diabetes was associated with differing treatment-related preferences. Utility values for patients with toenail onychomycosis represent a significant decline from full health that is exacerbated by comorbid diabetes.
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.