ArticleJournal of the Endocrine Society2026
Patient and Caregiver Preferences for Once-Weekly Injection Devices for the Treatment of Growth Hormone Deficiency.
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.
- Can long-acting growth hormone improve adherence in pediatric growth hormone deficiency?Endocrine · 2026Review
- Patient and Caregiver Preferences for Once-Weekly Injection Devices for the Treatment of Growth Hormone Deficiency.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Once-weekly long-acting growth hormone (GH) analogue (LA-GHA) treatments offer an alternative to once-daily GH injections for the treatment of children and adults with GH deficiency (GHD). With these new LA-GHA options, it is important to understand patients' and caregivers' treatment preferences. Objective: This work aimed to understand the injection/device attributes important to patients with GHD and caregivers when choosing LA-GHA treatment options. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a targeted literature review and qualitative interviews informed the development of an online survey. The survey included a discrete choice experiment, comprising a series of choice tasks. Respondents selected between hypothetical, experimentally designed, once-weekly LA-GHA device features corresponding to currently available devices. Study participants were patients/caregivers in the United States, self-reporting a GHD diagnosis and current short-acting GH injection use: adults (aged ≥18 years), caregivers of children (aged 3-11 years), and dyads of adolescents (aged 12-17 years) and their caregivers. Results: In total, 100 participants completed the survey: 50 adults, 25 caregivers, and 25 adolescent/caregiver dyads. Overall, the most important LA-GHA attributes identified were postinjection pain (27%), the number of injections needed for 1 full dose (23%), and the time needed to prepare the device before each injection (16%). The profile similar to somapacitan-beco had the highest predicted choice probability (82%) compared with the profiles similar to lonapegsomatropin-tcgd (16%) and somatrogon-ghla (2%). Conclusion: Understanding patient and caregiver preferences for LA-GHA devices with less injection pain and greater ease of use highlights the value of shared decision-making, potentially leading to better treatment adherence and subsequent clinical outcomes.
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.