Cargando…
Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations
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 in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8862509/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35193653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4 |
_version_ | 1784655068208824320 |
---|---|
author | Simons, Gwenda Caplan, Joshua DiSantostefano, Rachael L. Veldwijk, Jorien Englbrecht, Matthias Bywall, Karin Schölin Kihlbom, Ulrik Raza, Karim Falahee, Marie |
author_facet | Simons, Gwenda Caplan, Joshua DiSantostefano, Rachael L. Veldwijk, Jorien Englbrecht, Matthias Bywall, Karin Schölin Kihlbom, Ulrik Raza, Karim Falahee, Marie |
author_sort | Simons, Gwenda |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8862509 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88625092022-02-23 Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations Simons, Gwenda Caplan, Joshua DiSantostefano, Rachael L. Veldwijk, Jorien Englbrecht, Matthias Bywall, Karin Schölin Kihlbom, Ulrik Raza, Karim Falahee, Marie Arthritis Res Ther Review 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4. BioMed Central 2022-02-22 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8862509/ /pubmed/35193653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Simons, Gwenda Caplan, Joshua DiSantostefano, Rachael L. Veldwijk, Jorien Englbrecht, Matthias Bywall, Karin Schölin Kihlbom, Ulrik Raza, Karim Falahee, Marie Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations |
title | Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations |
title_full | Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations |
title_fullStr | Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations |
title_full_unstemmed | Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations |
title_short | Systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations |
title_sort | systematic review of quantitative preference studies of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis among patients and at-risk populations |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8862509/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35193653 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13075-021-02707-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT simonsgwenda systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT caplanjoshua systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT disantostefanorachaell systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT veldwijkjorien systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT englbrechtmatthias systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT bywallkarinscholin systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT kihlbomulrik systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT razakarim systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations AT falaheemarie systematicreviewofquantitativepreferencestudiesoftreatmentsforrheumatoidarthritisamongpatientsandatriskpopulations |