| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Ancillotti, Mirko, 1981-, et al.
(författare)
-
Prosocial Behaviour and Antibiotic Resistance : Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Patient. - : Springer. - 1178-1653 .- 1178-1661. ; 17:2, s. 191-202
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- IntroductionThe health of a community depends on the health of its individuals; therefore, individual health behaviour can implicitly affect the health of the entire community. This is particularly evident in the case of infectious diseases. Because the level of prosociality in a community might determine the effectiveness of health programmes, prosocial behaviour may be a crucial disease-control resource. This study aimed to extend the literature on prosociality and investigate the role of altruism in antibiotic decision making.MethodsA discrete choice experiment was conducted to assess the influence of altruism on the general public’s preferences regarding antibiotic treatment options. The survey was completed by 378 Swedes. Latent class analysis models were used to estimate antibiotic treatment characteristics and preference heterogeneity. A three-class model resulted in the best model fit, and altruism significantly impacted preference heterogeneity.ResultsOur findings suggest that people with higher altruism levels had more pronounced preferences for treatment options with lower contributions to antibiotic resistance and a lower likelihood of treatment failure. Furthermore, altruism was statistically significantly associated with sex, education, and health literacy.ConclusionsAntibiotic awareness, trust in healthcare systems, and non-discriminatory priority setting appear to be structural elements conducive to judicious and prosocial antibiotic behaviour. This study suggests that prosocial messages could help to decrease the demand for antibiotic treatments.
|
|
| 3. |
- Chuang, Ling-Hsiang, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluating the preferences and willingness-to-pay for oral antidiabetic drugs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in china : a discrete choice experiment
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Patient. - : Springer Nature. - 1178-1653 .- 1178-1661.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose: To quantify the preferences for an oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in China.Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) with hypothetical OAD profiles was performed among patients with T2DM recruited from both online and offline sources. Each patient completed 12 DCE choice tasks. The attributes, elicited through mixed methods, include blood glucose level decrease, blood glucose level stability, frequency of medication, gastrointestinal side effects, dose adjustment and out-of-pocket expense. The conditional logit regression model was used to analyze the data. Patients’ willingness-to-pay (WTP) was also calculated. Subgroup analyses based on patient characteristics were also conducted.Results: A total of 741 respondents were included in the analysis sample, covering 456 respondents online and 285 offline. The result showed that all attributes and levels were statistically significant, except one level “dose adjustment required for patients with hepatic or renal insufficiency” in the attribute of dose adjustment. WTP results showed that patients were willing to pay 12.06 and 23.20 yuan, respectively to reduce the frequency of medication from “once per day” and “three times per day” to “once every 2 weeks”, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that the frequency of medication (once versus two to three times per day) had the largest impact and influenced most coefficient estimates.Conclusion: The results suggest that Chinese patients with T2DM prioritized better efficacy, less frequency of medication, lower gastrointestinal side effects, no dose adjustment required for patients with hepatic or renal insufficiency, and less out-of-pocket expense of OAD treatment.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- DiSantostefano, Rachael L., et al.
(författare)
-
Research Priorities to Increase Confidence in and Acceptance of Health Preference Research: What Questions Should be Prioritized Now?
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Patient. - 1178-1653 .- 1178-1661. ; 17:2, s. 179-190
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AbstractBackground and ObjectiveThere has been an increase in the study and use of stated-preference methods to inform medicine development decisions. The objective of this study was to identify prioritized topics and questions relating to health preferences based on the perspective of members of the preference research community.MethodsPreference research stakeholders from industry, academia, consultancy, health technology assessment/regulatory, and patient organizations were recruited using professional networks and preference-targeted e-mail listservs and surveyed about their perspectives on 19 topics and questions for future studies that would increase acceptance of preference methods and their results by decision makers. The online survey consisted of an initial importance prioritization task, a best-worst scaling case 1 instrument, and open-ended questions. Rating counts were used for analysis. The best-worst scaling used a balanced incomplete block design.ResultsOne hundred and one participants responded to the survey invitation with 66 completing the best-worst scaling. The most important research topics related to the synthesis of preferences across studies, transferability across populations or related diseases, and method topics including comparison of methods and non-discrete choice experiment methods. Prioritization differences were found between respondents whose primary affiliation was academia versus other stakeholders. Academic researchers prioritized methodological/less studied topics; other stakeholders prioritized applied research topics relating to consistency of practice.ConclusionsAs the field of health preference research grows, there is a need to revisit and communicate previous work on preference selection and study design to ensure that new stakeholders are aware of this work and to update these works where necessary. These findings might encourage discussion and alignment among different stakeholders who might hold different research priorities. Research on the application of previous preference research to new contexts will also help increase the acceptance of health preference information by decision makers.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Gangannagaripalli, J., et al.
(författare)
-
A Standard Set of Value-Based Patient-Centered Outcomes and Measures of Overall Health in Adults
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Patient-Patient Centered Outcomes Research. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1178-1653 .- 1178-1661. ; 15:3, s. 341-351
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The definition of population-specific outcomes is an essential precondition for the implementation of value-based health care. We developed a minimum standard outcome set for overall adult health (OAH) to facilitate the implementation of value-based health care in tracking, comparing, and improving overall health care outcomes of adults across multiple conditions, which would be of particular relevance for primary care and public health populations. Methods The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) convened an international panel (patients, clinicians, and topic experts). Following the development of a conceptual framework, a modified Delphi method (supported by public consultations) was implemented to identify, in sequence, the relevant domains, the best instruments for measuring them, the timing of measurement, and the relevant adjustment variables. Findings Outcomes were identified in relation to overall health status and the domains of physical, mental, and social health. Three instruments covering these domains were identified: PROMIS Scale v1.2-Global Health (10 items), WHO Wellbeing Index (5 items), and the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (12 items). Case-mix variables included a range of sociodemographic and biometric measures. Yearly measurement was proposed for all outcomes and most case-mix variables. Interpretation The ICHOM OAH Standard Set has been developed through consensus-based methods based on predefined criteria following high standards for the identification and selection of high-quality measures The involvements of a wide range of stakeholders supports the acceptability of the set, which is readily available for use and feasibility testing in clinical settings.
|
|
| 9. |
- Grauman, Åsa, 1982-, et al.
(författare)
-
Communicating test results from a general health checkup: the public’s preferences from a discrete choice experiment survey
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Patient Related Outcome Measures. - : Springer Nature. - 1179-271X. ; 14:5, s. 649-660
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Health checks can detect risk factors and initiate prevention of cardiovascular diseases but there is no consensus on how to communicate the results. The aim of this study was to investigate the preferences of the general population for communicating health check results.Methods: A randomly selected sample of the Swedish population aged 40–70 years completed a discrete choice experiment survey that included questions on sociodemographics, lifestyle and health and 15 choice questions consisting of six attributes (written results, notification method, consultation time, waiting time, lifestyle recommendation and cost). Data were analyzed with a latent class analysis (LCA). Relative importance of the attributes and predicted uptake for several scenarios were estimated.Results: In the analysis, 432 individuals were included (response rate 29.6%). A three-class LCA model best fit the data. Cost was the most important attribute in all classes. Preferences heterogeneity was found for the other attributes; in Class 1, receiving consultation time and the written results were important, respondents in Class 2 dominated on costs and respondents in Class 3 found consultation time, waiting time and lifestyle recommendations to be important. Health literate respondents were more likely to belong to Class 3. The predicted uptake rates ranged from 7 to 88% for different health checks with large differences across the classes.Conclusions: Cost was most important when deciding whether to participate in a health check. Although cost was the most important factor, it is not sufficient to offer health checks free-of-charge if other requirements regarding how the test results are communicated are not in place; participants need to be able to understand their results.
|
|
| 10. |
- Janssens, Rosanne, et al.
(författare)
-
Patient Preferences in the Medical Product Life Cycle : What do Stakeholders Think? Semi-Structured Qualitative Interviews in Europe and the USA
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Patient. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1178-1653 .- 1178-1661. ; 12:5, s. 513-526
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundPatient preferences (PP), which are investigated in PP studies using qualitative or quantitative methods, are a growing area of interest to the following stakeholders involved in the medical product lifecycle: academics, health technology assessment bodies, payers, industry, patients, physicians, and regulators. However, the use of PP in decisions along the medical product lifecycle remains limited. As the adoption of PP heavily relies on these stakeholders, knowledge of their perceptions of PP is critical.ObjectiveThis study aimed to characterize stakeholders’ attitudes, needs, and concerns with respect to PP in decision making along the medical product lifecycle.MethodsSemi-structured interviews (n = 143) were conducted with academics (n = 24), health technology assessment/payer representatives (n = 24), industry representatives (n = 24), patients, caregivers and patient representatives (n = 24), physicians (n = 24), and regulators (n = 23) from seven European countries and the USA. Interviews were conducted between April and August 2017. The framework method was used to organize the data and identify themes and key findings in each interviewed stakeholder group.ResultsInterviewees reported being unfamiliar (43%), moderately familiar (42%), or very familiar (15%) with preference methods and studies. Interviewees across stakeholder groups generally supported the idea of using PP in the medical product lifecycle but expressed mixed opinions about the feasibility and impact of using PP in decision making. Interviewees from all stakeholder groups stressed the importance of increasing stakeholders’ understanding of the concept of PP and preference methods and ensuring patients’ understanding of the questions asked in PP studies. Key concerns and needs in each interviewed stakeholder group were as follows: (1) academics: investigating the validity, reliability, reproducibility, and generalizability of preference methods; (2) health technology assessment/payer representatives: developing quality criteria for evaluating PP studies and gaining insights into how to weigh them in reimbursement/payer decision making; (3) industry representatives: obtaining guidance on PP studies and recognition on the importance of PP from decision makers; (4) patients, caregivers, and patient representatives: providing an incentive and adequate information towards patients when participating in PP studies; (5) physicians: avoiding bias as a result of commercial agendas in PP studies and clarifying how to deal with subjective and emotional elements when measuring PP; and (6) regulators: avoiding the misuse of PP study results to overrule the traditional efficacy and safety criteria used for marketing authorization and obtaining robust PP study results.ConclusionsDespite the interest all interviewed stakeholder groups reported in PP, the effective use of PP in decision making across the medical product lifecycle is currently hampered by a lack of standardization and consensus on how to both measure and use PP.
|
|
