ArticleTrials2024
Exploring patient perspectives on the impact of resuming cost sharing: a qualitative analysis.
Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe ACCESS trial showed that those who received a copayment elimination benefit had a modest improvement in their adherence to medications, but no improvement in clinical outcomes. This is consistent with other studies that have demonstrated that time-limited copayment elimination was welcomed by participants. However, the removal of such benefits can be problematic, as participants may have become accustomed to receiving the benefit, and made changes to their spending that would need to be reconsidered. We aimed to explore participants' experience with resuming cost sharing for their medications at the end of the ACCESS trial and if this experience influenced their willingness to participate in future trials like ACCESS.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 former participants of the ACCESS trial who were receiving the copayment elimination intervention, with discussions focused on the loss of the copayment elimination. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed in duplicate using thematic analysis.
resultsFour primary themes emerged from the analysis, including emotionality regarding loss of benefits; notification of benefit termination, describing tangible losses from coverage ending, but resistance to acknowledging negative impacts; and acceptability of receiving a temporary financial benefit. Many participants described negative emotions around the loss of coverage and concern about affording care for their chronic diseases. Despite negative emotions about the end of their study benefit, participants generally had a positive view of the study and would participate again in a future study of this nature.
conclusionThe positive tangible and emotional benefits of the copayment elimination over 3 years outweighed the negative emotions and impacts associated with having to become reaccustomed to life without it. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Within the ACCESS trial, participants were involved in the design, modification, and implementation of the program using multiple focus groups. The current study aimed to engage patients to provide input on their experience and engagement with the copayment elimination program.
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.