ArticleJournal of the Endocrine Society2026
Preferences for Subtyping Primary Aldosteronism: A Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in Journal of the Endocrine Society, 2026. 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.
- Preferences for Subtyping Primary Aldosteronism: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2026Article
- Primary aldosteronism beyond laterality: integrating subtype assignment with outcome-oriented risk stratification.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
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
Context: Primary aldosteronism (PA) affects 10% to 15% of individuals with hypertension and increases cardiovascular risk. Differentiating between unilateral and bilateral PA determines optimal treatment and typically requires adrenal vein sampling (AVS). Emerging subtyping methods include predictive algorithms and nuclear imaging. Objective: This study explores hypertensive individuals' preferences for different PA subtyping strategies. Methods: Two labeled discrete choice experiments (DCEs) evaluated preferences for subtyping methods based on test accuracy, waiting time, adverse effects, and out-of-pocket cost. Latent class conditional logit (LCL) modeling segmented participants by preferences, while policy simulation analyses examined uptake variations by age, sex, and income. Results: Among 583 hypertensive Australian adults (mean age: 48 years; 48% female), 85% were willing to undergo PA subtyping. Participants prioritized accuracy, shorter waiting times, minimal side effects, and lower costs. LCL analysis revealed that participants who were older, female, or considered themselves less busy were more likely to opt for PA subtyping. Subtyping uptake was highest for algorithm-based methods (∼54%) with its uptake rate increasing to 68% after factoring in cost. Conclusion: Preferences for PA subtyping are driven by cost, invasiveness, and waiting time. Less-invasive, faster, and low-cost methods were preferred, even if they are slightly less accurate than AVS. Further research is needed to optimize the accuracy of subtyping algorithms and facilitate implementation in clinical practice.
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.