| 1. |
- Bayliss, Kerin, et al.
(författare)
-
Perceptions of predictive testing for those at risk of developing a chronic inflammatory disease : a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of Risk Research. - : ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD. - 1366-9877 .- 1466-4461. ; 21:2, s. 167-189
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The availability of tests to predict the risk of developing chronic diseases is increasing. The identification of individuals at high risk of disease can trigger early intervention to reduce the risk of disease and its severity. In order for predictive tests to be accepted and used by those at risk, there is a need to understand people's perceptions of predictive testing.Method: A meta-synthesis of qualitative research that explored patient and public perceptions of predictive testing for chronic inflammatory diseases was conducted. Studies were coded by researchers and patient research partners, and then organised into common themes associated with the acceptability or use of predictive testing.Results: Perceived barriers to predictive testing were identified, including a concern about a lack of confidentiality around the use of risk information; a lack of motivation for change; poor communication of information; and a possible impact on emotional well-being. In order to reduce these barriers, the literature shows that a patient-centred approach is required at each stage of the testing process. This includes the consideration of individual needs, such as accessibility and building motivation for change; readily available and easy to understand pre and post-test information; support for patients on how to deal with the implications of their results; and the development of condition specific lifestyle intervention programmes to facilitate sustainable lifestyle changes.Conclusion: Patients and members of the public had some concerns about predictive testing; however, a number of strategies to reduce barriers and increase acceptability are available. Further research is required to inform the development of a resource that supports the individual to make an informed decision about whether to engage in a predictive test, what test results mean, and how to access post-test support.
|
|
| 2. |
- 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.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Falahee, Marie, et al.
(författare)
-
Patients' Perceptions of Their Relatives' Risk of Developing Rheumatoid Arthritis and of the Potential for Risk Communication, Prediction, and Modulation
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Arthritis care & research. - : WILEY. - 2151-464X .- 2151-4658. ; 69:10, s. 1558-1565
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To understand the perspectives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) about the risk of their relatives developing RA in the future, and about communicating with their relatives concerning risk and its modulation.Methods: Twenty-one RA patients took part in semistructured interviews.Results: Participants reported willingness to communicate with relatives about their risk of developing RA, but described choosing which relatives to communicate with, on the basis of the relatives' perceived receptivity to such risk information. Participants described the potential for risk information to cause negative emotions. Some participants did not consider RA to be hereditable, and few reported smoking as a risk factor. Patients described a lack of public awareness about the causes of RA and the negative impact that RA has on the quality of life. Awareness of this negative impact was identified as an important driver for predictive and preventive strategies. Participants held positive perceptions of predictive testing for RA, though the results of predictive tests were conceptualized as having a high degree of accuracy. Negative views of predictive testing were associated with an appreciation of the probabilistic nature of risk information. Participants felt that their relatives would prefer lifestyle modification over medication as a risk reduction strategy.Conclusion: Information about risk factors for RA, and the potential impact of RA on the quality of life, is needed to support family communication about RA risk. Management of expectations is needed in relation to the probabilistic nature of risk information, and appropriate support should be provided for negative psychological outcomes.
|
|
| 5. |
- Falahee, Marie, et al.
(författare)
-
Treatment preferences for preventive interventions for rheumatoid arthritis : protocol of a mixed methods case study for the Innovative Medicines Initiative PREFER project
- 2021
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 11:4, s. e045851-e045851
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction Amidst growing consensus that stakeholder decision-making during drug development should be informed by an understanding of patient preferences, the Innovative Medicines Initiative project 'Patient Preferences in Benefit-Risk Assessments during the Drug Life Cycle' (PREFER) is developing evidence-based recommendations about how and when patient preferences should be integrated into the drug life cycle. This protocol describes a PREFER clinical case study which compares two preference elicitation methodologies across several populations and provides information about benefit-risk trade-offs by those at risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) for preventive interventions. Methods and analysis This mixed methods study will be conducted in three countries (UK, Germany, Romania) to assess preferences of (1) first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with RA and (2) members of the public. Focus groups using nominal group techniques (UK) and ranking surveys (Germany and Romania) will identify and rank key treatment attributes. Focus group transcripts will be analysed thematically using the framework method and average rank orders calculated. These results will inform the treatment attributes to be assessed in a survey including a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a probabilistic threshold technique (PTT). The survey will also include measures of sociodemographic variables, health literacy, numeracy, illness perceptions and beliefs about medicines. The survey will be administered to (1) 400 FDRs of patients with RA (UK); (2) 100 FDRs of patients with RA (Germany); and (3) 1000 members of the public in each of UK, Germany and Romania. Logit-based approaches will be used to analyse the DCE and imputation and interval regression for the PTT. Ethics and dissemination This study has been approved by the London-Hampstead Research Ethics Committee (19/LO/0407) and the Ethics Committee of the Friedrich-Alexander-Universitat Erlangen-Nurnberg (92_17 B). The protocol has been approved by the PREFER expert review board. The results will be disseminated widely and will inform the PREFER recommendations.
|
|
| 6. |
- Grauman, Åsa, 1982-, et al.
(författare)
-
Public perceptions of myocardial infarction: Do illness perceptions predict preferences for health check results
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Preventive Medicine Reports. - : Elsevier. - 2211-3355. ; 26, s. 101683-101683
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Illness perceptions are associated with attitudes towards preventive behaviors and are therefore crucial to consider in the context of prevention of cardiovascular diseases. We investigated illness perceptions of the public about myocardial infarction, and whether they predict public preferences for health check test results.A randomly selected sample (N = 423) of the Swedish public aged 40–70 completed an online-survey. It included the brief illness perception questionnaire, items assessing sociodemographic, lifestyle and health factors and a discrete choice experiment incorporating six attributes of health checks (written results, notification method, consultation time, waiting time, lifestyle recommendation and cost). Associations between illness perceptions and sociodemographic- and cardiovascular risk factors were analyzed using multivariate linear regression. Preference data were analyzed with a mixed multinomial logit model.Presence of smoking, hypertension, obesity and lack of physical activity were associated with weaker causal beliefs for the relevant risk factor, while presence of a high stress level was associated with stronger causal beliefs for stress. Low control predicted unwillingness to receive lifestyle recommendations. Attributing family history as the most important personal cause of MI predicted unwillingness to participate in health checks.Illness perceptions differed due to presence of risk factors, age, sex and health literacy. Furthermore, illness perceptions influenced preferences for health check test results and willingness to participate in health checks. Illness perceptions should therefore be addressed when designing health communication and preventive interventions such as health checks, and methods for promoting accurate illness perceptions should be developed.
|
|
| 7. |
- Russo, Selena, et al.
(författare)
-
Taking into Account Patient Preferences : A Consensus Study on the Assessment of Psychological Dimensions Within Patient Preference Studies
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Patient Preference and Adherence. - 1177-889X. ; 15, s. 1331-1345
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Patient preferences are gaining recognition among key stakeholders involved in benefit-risk decision-making along the medical product lifecycle. However, one of the main challenges of integrating patient preferences in benefit-risk decision-making is understanding differences in patient preference, which may be attributable to clinical characteristics (eg age, medical history) or psychosocial factors. Measuring the latter may provide valuable information to decision-makers but there is limited guidance regarding which psychological dimensions may influence patient preferences and which psychological instruments should be considered for inclusion in patient preference studies. This paper aims to provide such guidance by advancing evidence and consensus-based recommendations and considerations. Findings of a recent systematic review on psychological constructs having an impact on patients’ preferences and health-related decisions were expanded with input from an expert group (n = 11). These data were then used as the basis for final recommendations developed through two rounds of formal evaluation via an online Delphi consensus process involving international experts in the field of psychology, medical decision-making, and risk communication (n = 27). Three classes of recommendations emerged. Eleven psychological constructs reached consensus to be recommended for inclusion with the strongest consensus existing for health literacy, numeracy, illness perception and treatment-related beliefs. We also proposed a set of descriptive and checklist criteria to appraise available psychological measures to assist researchers and other stakeholders in including psychological assessment when planning patient preference studies. These recommendations can guide researchers and other stakeholders when designing and interpreting patient preference studies with a potential high impact in clinical practice and medical product benefit-risk decision-making processes.
|
|
| 8. |
- Russo, Selena, et al.
(författare)
-
Understanding Patients' Preferences : A Systematic Review of Psychological Instruments Used in Patients' Preference and Decision Studies
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Value in Health. - : Elsevier BV. - 1098-3015 .- 1524-4733. ; 22:4, s. 491-501
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundResearch has been mainly focused on how to elicit patient preferences, with less attention on why patients form certain preferences.ObjectivesTo assess which psychological instruments are currently used and which psychological constructs are known to have an impact on patients' preferences and health-related decisions including the formation of preferences and preference heterogeneity.MethodsA systematic database search was undertaken to identify relevant studies. From the selected studies, the following information was extracted: study objectives, study population, design, psychological dimensions investigated, and instruments used to measure psychological variables.ResultsThirty-three studies were identified that described the association between a psychological construct, measured using a validated instrument, and patients' preferences or health-related decisions. We identified 33 psychological instruments and 18 constructs, and categorized the instruments into 5 groups, namely, motivational factors, cognitive factors, individual differences, emotion and mood, and health beliefs.ConclusionsThis review provides an overview of the psychological factors and related instruments in the context of patients' preferences and decisions in healthcaresettings. Our results indicate that measures of health literacy, numeracy, and locus of control have an impact on health-related preferences and decisions. Within the category of constructs that could explain preference and decision heterogeneity, health locus of control is a strong predictor of decisions in several healthcare contexts and is useful to consider when designing a patient preference study. Future research should continue to explore the association of psychological constructs with preference formation and heterogeneity to build on these initial recommendations.
|
|
| 9. |
- Schölin Bywall, Karin, et al.
(författare)
-
Does being exposed to an educational tool influence patient preferences? The influence of an educational tool on patient preferences assessed by a discrete choice experiment.
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Patient Education and Counseling. - : Elsevier BV. - 0738-3991 .- 1873-5134. ; 104:10, s. 2577-2585
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: There is an increased interest in patient preferences informing the development and authorisation of medical products. A requirement for robust and meaningful results of such studies is that patients adequately understand the risks and benefits associated with treatments for which their preferences are elicited. This study aims to determine the influence of an educational tool, compared with traditional written information on patient preferences elicited in a discrete choice experiment (DCE).Methods: Treatment preferences of Swedish patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were assessed using a DCE. Patients were recruited via clinics, a research panel, and the Swedish Rheumatism Association. Respondents received training materials either as plain written text or as an online educational tool. The educational tool was designed to enhance understanding of the written text by using graphics, pictograms, icon arrays, spoken text, and click-on functions. Data were analysed using random parameter logit models.Results: 675 patients with RA were included in the analysis. The patients received either a written information (n = 358) or information via an educational tool (n = 317). Respondents receiving the educational tool placed relatively more importance on all included side effects in their decision making, compared to respondents receiving the written text, who placed greater importance on treatment effectiveness and administration methods.Conclusion: Compared to the respondents receiving the written text, the decisions of respondents receiving the educational tool were more influenced by medication side effects. Further research is needed to provide guidance on how and when to use educational tools to inform and elicit patients’ preferences.Practice implications: The ways in which attributes are presented to patients significantly impacts preferences measured in a DCE.
|
|
| 10. |
- Schölin Bywall, Karin, et al.
(författare)
-
Patient preferences on rheumatoid arthritis second-line treatment : a discrete choice experiment of Swedish patients
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Arthritis Research & Therapy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1478-6362. ; 22
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundPreference assessments of patients with rheumatoid arthritis can support clinical therapeutic decisions for including biologic and targeted synthetic medicines to use. This study assesses patient preferences for attributes of second-line therapies and heterogeneity within these preferences to estimate the relative importance of treatment characteristics and to calculate the minimum benefit levels patients require to accept higher levels of side effects.MethodsBetween November 2018 to August 2019, patients with rheumatoid arthritis were recruited to a survey containing demographic and disease-related questions as well as a discrete choice experiment to measure their preferences for second-line therapies using biologics or Janus kinases inhibitors. Treatment characteristics included were route of administration, frequency of use, probability of mild short-term side effects, probability of side effects changing appearance, probability of psychological side effects, probability of severe side effects and effectiveness of treatment.ResultsA total of 358 patients were included in the analysis. A latent class analysis revealed three preference patterns: (1) treatment effectiveness as the single most important attribute, (2) route of administration as the most important attribute, closely followed by frequency of use and psychological side effects and (3) severe side effects as the most important attribute followed by psychological side effects. In addition, disease duration and mild side effects influenced the patients’ choices.ConclusionRespondents found either effectiveness, route of administration or severe side effects as the most important attribute. Patients noting effectiveness as most important were more willing than other patients to accept higher risks of side effects.
|
|
| 11. |
- Simons, Gwenda, et al.
(författare)
-
Acceptable risks of treatments to prevent rheumatoid arthritis among first-degree relatives: demographic and psychological predictors of risk tolerance
- 2022
-
Ingår i: RMD Open. - : BMJ. - 2056-5933. ; 8:2, s. e002593-e002593
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives To quantify tolerance to risks of preventive treatments among first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods Preventive treatments for RA are under investigation. In a preference survey, adult FDRs assumed a 60% chance of developing RA within 2 years and made choices between no treatment and hypothetical preventive treatment options with a fixed level of benefit (reduction in chance of developing RA from 60% to 20%) and varying levels of risks. Using a probabilistic threshold technique, each risk was increased or decreased until participants switched their choice. Perceived risk of RA, health literacy, numeracy, Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire and Beliefs about Medicines Questionnaire-General were also assessed. Maximum acceptable risk (MAR) was summarised using descriptive statistics. Associations between MARs and participants’ characteristics were assessed using interval regression with effects coding.Results 289 FDRs (80 male) responded. The mean MAR for a 40% reduction in chance of developing RA was 29.08% risk of mild side effects, 9.09% risk of serious infection and 0.85% risk of a serious side effect. Participants aged over 60 years were less tolerant of serious infection risk (mean MAR ±2.06%) than younger participants. Risk of mild side effects was less acceptable to participants who perceived higher likelihood of developing RA (mean MAR ±3.34%) and more acceptable to those believing that if they developed RA it would last for a long time (mean MAR ±4.44%).Conclusions Age, perceived chance of developing RA and perceived duration of RA were associated with tolerance to some risks of preventive RA therapy.
|
|
| 12. |
- Simons, Gwenda, et al.
(författare)
-
Perceptions of first-degree relatives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis about lifestyle modifications and pharmacological interventions to reduce the risk of rheumatoid arthritis development : a qualitative interview study
- 2018
-
Ingår i: BMC Rheumatology. - : Springer Nature. - 2520-1026. ; 2:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundThere is increasing interest in the identification of people at risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to monitor the emergence of early symptoms (and thus allow early therapy), offer lifestyle advice to reduce the impact of environmental risk factors and potentially offer preventive pharmacological treatment for those at high risk. Close biological relatives of people with RA are at an increased risk of developing RA and are therefore potential candidates for research studies, screening initiatives and preventive interventions. To ensure the success of approaches of this kind, a greater understanding of the perceptions of this group relating to preventive measures is needed.MethodsTwenty-four first-degree relatives of patients with an existing diagnosis of RA from the UK, three from Germany and seven from Austria (age: 21-67 years) took part in semi-structured interviews exploring their perceptions of RA risk, preventive medicine and lifestyle changes to reduce RA risk. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsMany first-degree relatives indicated that they anticipated being happy to make lifestyle changes such as losing weight or changing their diet to modify their risk of developing RA. Participants further indicated that in order to make any lifestyle changes it would be useful to know their personal risk of developing RA. Others implied they would not contemplate making lifestyle changes, including stopping smoking, unless this would significantly reduce or eliminate their risk of developing RA. Many first-degree relatives had more negative perceptions about taking preventive medication to reduce their risk of RA, and listed concerns about potential side effects as one of the reasons for not wanting to take preventive medicines. Others would be more willing to consider drug interventions although some indicated that they would wish to wait until symptoms developed.ConclusionsInformation targeted at those considered to be at risk of RA should contain information about RA, the extent to which risk can be quantified at an individual level and how risk levels may differ depending on whether early symptoms are present. The benefits (and risks) of lifestyle changes and pharmacological interventions as potential preventive measures should be clearly described.
|
|
| 13. |
- Simons, Gwenda, et al.
(författare)
-
Preferences for preventive treatments for rheumatoid arthritis : discrete choice survey in the UK, Germany and Romania
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Rheumatology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1462-0324 .- 1462-0332. ; 62:2, s. 596-605
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To quantify preferences for preventive therapies for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) across three countries.METHODS: A web-based survey including a discrete choice experiment was administered to adults recruited via survey panels in the UK, Germany and Romania. Participants were asked to assume they were experiencing arthralgia and had a 60% chance of developing RA in the next 2 years and completed 15 choices between no treatment and two hypothetical preventive treatments. Treatments were defined by six attributes (effectiveness, risks and frequency/route of administration) with varying levels. Participants also completed a choice task with fixed profiles reflecting subjective estimates of candidate preventive treatments. Latent class models (LCMs) were conducted and the relative importance of attributes, benefit-risk trade-offs and predicted treatment uptake was subsequently calculated.RESULTS: Completed surveys from 2959 participants were included in the analysis. Most participants preferred treatment over no treatment and valued treatment effectiveness to reduce risk more than other attributes. A five-class LCM best fitted the data. Country, perceived risk of RA, health literacy and numeracy predicted class membership probability. Overall, the maximum acceptable risk for a 40% reduction in the chance of getting RA (60% to 20%) was 21.7%, 19.1% and 2.2% for mild side effects, serious infection and serious side effects, respectively. Predicted uptake of profiles reflecting candidate prevention therapies differed across classes.CONCLUSION: Effective preventive pharmacological treatments for RA were acceptable to most participants. The relative importance of treatment attributes and likely uptake of fixed treatment profiles were predicted by participant characteristics.
|
|
| 14. |
- Simons, Gwenda, et al.
(författare)
-
Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Arthritis Research & Therapy. - : Springer Nature. - 1478-6362. ; 24:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Treatments used for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are under investigation for their efficacy to prevent RA in at risk groups. It is therefore important to understand treatment preferences of those at risk. We systematically reviewed quantitative preference studies of drugs to treat, or prevent RA, to inform the design of further studies and trials of RA prevention. Stated preference studies for RA treatment or prevention were identified through a search of five databases. Study characteristics and results were extracted, and the relative importance of different types of treatment attributes was compared across populations. Twenty three studies were included 20 of RA treatments (18 of patients; 2 of the general public) and 3 prevention studies with first-degree relatives (FDRs). Benefits, risks, administration method and cost (when included) were important determinants of treatment choice. A benefit was more important than a risk attribute in half of the studies of RA treatment that included a benefit attribute and 2/3 studies of RA prevention. There was variability in the relative importance of attributes across the few prevention studies. In studies with non-patient participants, attributes describing confidence in treatment effectiveness/safety were more important determinants of choice than in studies with patients. Most preference studies relating to RA are of treatments for established RA. Few studies examine preferences for treatments to prevent RA. Given intense research focus on RA prevention, additional preference studies in this context are needed. Variation in treatment preferences across different populations is not well understood and direct comparisons are needed.
|
|
| 15. |
- Smith, Meredith Y., et al.
(författare)
-
Patients as research partners in preference studies: learnings from IMI-PREFER
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Research Involvement and Engagement. - 2056-7529. ; 9:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: There is growing recognition of the importance of patient and public stakeholder involvement (PPI) in patient preference research. However, limited evidence exists regarding the impact, barriers and enablers of PPI in preference studies. The Innovative Medicines Initiative (IMI)-PREFER project conducted a series of preference case studies which incorporated PPI.Objective: To describe: (1) how PPI was operationalized in the PREFER case studies, (2) the impact of PPI, and (3) factors that served to impede and facilitate PPI.Methods: We reviewed the PREFER final study reports to determine how patient partners were involved. We conducted a thematic framework analysis to characterize the impact of PPI and then administered a questionnaire to the PREFER study leads to identify barriers and facilitators to effective PPI.Results: Eight PREFER case studies involved patients as research partners. Patient partners were involved in activities spanning all phases of the patient preference research process, including in study design, conduct and dissemination. However, the type and degree of patient partner involvement varied considerably. Positive impacts of PPI included improvements in the: (1) quality of the research and research process; (2) patient partner empowerment; (3) study transparency and dissemination of results; (4) research ethics, and (5) trust and respect between the research team and the patient community. Of the 13 barriers identified, the 3 most frequently reported were inadequate resources, insufficient time to fully involve patient partners, and uncertainty regarding how to operationalize the role of ‘patient partner. Among the 12 facilitators identified, the two most frequently cited were (1) having a clearly stated purpose for involving patients as research partners; and (2) having multiple patient partners involved in the study.Conclusion: PPI had many positive impacts on the PREFER studies. Preference study leads with prior PPI experience reported a greater number of positive impacts than those with no such experience. In light of the numerous barriers identified, multi-faceted implementation strategies should be considered to support adoption, integration and sustainment of PPI within preference research. Additional case studies of patient partner involvement in preference research are needed as well to inform best practices in this area.
|
|
| 16. |
- Stack, Rebecca J., et al.
(författare)
-
Perceptions of risk and predictive testing held by the first-degree relatives of patients with rheumatoid arthritis in England, Austria and Germany : a qualitative study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 6:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives The family members of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are at increased risk of developing RA and are potential candidates for predictive testing. This study explored the perceptions of first-degree relatives of people with RA about being at risk of RA and engaging in predictive testing. Methods 34 first-degree relatives (siblings and offspring) of patients with RA from the UK, Germany and Austria participated in semistructured interviews about their perceptions of RA risk and the prospect of predictive testing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Results First-degree relatives were aware of their susceptibility to RA, but were unsure of the extent of their risk. When considering their future risk, some relatives were concerned about the potential impact that RA would have on their lives. Relatives were concerned that knowing their actual risk would increase their anxiety and would affect decisions about their future. Also, relatives were concerned about the levels of uncertainty associated with predictive testing. Those in favour of knowing their future risk felt that they would need additional support to understand the risk information and cope with the emotional impact of this information. Conclusions Identifying individuals at risk of RA may allow targeted interventions to reduce the risk and consequence of future disease; however, relatives have concerns about predictive testing and risk information. The development of strategies to quantify and communicate risk needs to take these views into account and incorporate approaches to mitigate concerns and minimise the psychological impact of risk information.
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
- Veldwijk, Jorien, et al.
(författare)
-
Maximum Acceptable Risk Estimation Based on a Discrete Choice Experiment and a Probabilistic Threshold Technique
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Patient. - : Springer. - 1178-1653 .- 1178-1661.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ObjectiveWe aimed to empirically compare maximum acceptable risk results estimated using both a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and a probabilistic threshold technique (PTT).MethodsMembers of the UK general public (n = 982) completed an online survey including a DCE and a PTT (in random order) measuring their preferences for preventative treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. For the DCE, a Bayesian D-efficient design consisting of four blocks of 15 choice tasks was constructed including six attributes with varying levels. The PTT used identical risk and benefit attributes. For the DCE, a panel mixed-logit model was conducted, both mean and individual estimates were used to calculate maximum acceptable risk. For the PTT, interval regression was used to calculate maximum acceptable risk. Perceived complexity of the choice tasks and preference heterogeneity were investigated for both methods.ResultsMaximum acceptable risk confidence intervals of both methods overlapped for serious infection and serious side effects but not for mild side effects (maximum acceptable risk was 32.7 percent-points lower in the PTT). Although, both DCE and PTT tasks overall were considered easy or very easy to understand and answer, significantly more respondents rated the DCE choice tasks as easier to understand compared with those who rated the PTT as easier (7-percentage point difference; p < 0.05).ConclusionsMaximum acceptable risk estimate confidence intervals based on a DCE and a PTT overlapped for two out of the three included risk attributes. More respondents rated the DCE as easier to understand. This may suggest that the DCE is better suited in studies estimating maximum acceptable risk for multiple risk attributes of differing severity, while the PTT may be better suited when measuring heterogeneity in maximum acceptable risk estimates or when investigating one or more serious adverse events.
|
|
