Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39252123›Full record

ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2024

Preferences for coordinated care for rare diseases: discrete choice experiment.

Stephen Morris, Holly Walton, Amy Simpson, Kerry Leeson-Beevers, Lara Bloom, Amy Hunter, Angus I G Ramsay, Naomi J Fulop, Lyn S Chitty, Joe Kai and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

15 authors.

Stephen MorrisPrimary Care Unit, Department of Public Health & Primary Care, University of Cambridge, East Forvie Building, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK. sm2428@medschl.cam.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5828-3563
Holly WaltonDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, England, UK.
Amy SimpsonOxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
Kerry Leeson-BeeversAlström Syndrome, England, UK.
Lara BloomThe Ehlers-Danlos Society, London, UK.
Amy HunterGenetic Alliance UK, London, UK.
Angus I G RamsayDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, England, UK.
Naomi J FulopDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, England, UK.
Lyn S ChittyLondon North Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Joe KaiDivision of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Alastair G SutcliffeUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Maria KokocinskaBirmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Larissa KerecukBirmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Christine A TaylorDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, England, UK.
Pei Li NgDepartment of Applied Health Research, University College London, England, UK.

Funding

Health Services and Delivery Research Programme 16/116/82
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence suggests that coordination of care for people affected by rare diseases is poor. In order to improve the way that care is coordinated it is necessary to understand the preferences of people affected by these conditions, and providers. The aim of this study was to examine patient, parent and carer, and health care professional preferences for different attributes of care coordination for people affected by rare diseases. We conducted a discrete choice experiment using online surveys. There were no restrictions on participants in terms of rare conditions, demographic factors other than age, or geographical location within the UK. Choice scenarios were based on the following attributes: annual cost of attending appointments; access to health records; access to clinical expertise; support of a care coordinator; access to a specialist centre; and, the existence of a documented plan for emergency care. Data were analysed using alternative-specific conditional logit regression models.

resultsValid responses were obtained from 996 individuals (528 patients, 280 carers, 188 health care professionals) between August and December 2019. All attributes significantly influenced the type of service respondents preferred. Patients, carers and health professionals' preferences for care coordination were influenced by: the cost of attending appointments; access to health records; clinical expertise; role of care coordinators; access to specialist centres; and the existence of plan for emergency care. There were no statistically significant differences in the preferences between patients and carers. Preferences of health professionals differed to those of patients and carers. Both patients and carers selected responses which granted them a greater degree of autonomy in relation to the role of care coordinators, whereas health professionals preferred services where care coordinators had more autonomy. Health care professionals also expressed a stronger preference for a documented formal emergency plan to be in place.

conclusionsThe findings highlight that people value better coordinated care, in line with policy documents emphasising commitments to coordinated care for people affected by rare diseases. This study highlights the factors that could be included in service provision as ways of improving the coordination of care for people affected by rare diseases.

Indexed as

Rare DiseasesAdultFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCare coordinationDiscrete choice experimentPreferencesRare conditionsRare diseases

Identifiers

PMID39252123
PMCPMC11386106

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.