Loading...
 
Back to the list
Mediterr J Rheumatol 2021;32(2):104-11
Article Links
A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiment Studies in Rheumatoid Arthritis Biological Medicines
Saman Zartab1, Shekoufeh Nikfar1, Naeim Karimpour-Fard1, Ahmadreza Jamshidi2, Vida Varahrami3, Ali Homayouni1, Abbas Kebriaeezadeh1
Authors Information

1. Pharmaceutical Management & Economic Research Center and Department of Pharmacoeconomics and Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2. Rheumatology Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3. Department  of  Economics,  School  of  Economics  and  Political  Sciences,  Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran


Zartab S, Nikfar S, Karimpour-Fard N, Jamshidi A, Varahrami V , Homayouni A , Kebriaeezadeh A

Keywords: Rheumatoid arthritis, discrete choice experiment, patient preference, biological products, conjoint method
References
  1. Alten R, Krueger K, Rellecke J, Schiffner-Rohe J, Behmer O, Schiffhorst G, Nolting H-D. Examining patient preferences in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis using a discrete-choice approach. Patient Preference Adherence 2016;10:2217.
  2. Sangha O. Epidemiology of rheumatic diseases. Rheumatology 2000;39(suppl_2):3-12.
  3. Husni ME, Betts KA, Griffith J, Song Y, Ganguli A. Benefit-risk trade-offs for treatment decisions in moderate-to-severe rheumatoid arthritis: focus on the patient perspective. Rheumatol Int 2017;37(9):1423-1434.
  4. Suarez-Almazor ME, Conner-Spady B, Kendall CJ, Russell AS, Skeith K. Lack of congruence in the ratings of patients’ health status by patients and their physicians. Med Decis Making 2001;21(2):113-21.
  5. Kassirer JP. Incorporating patients' preferences into medical decisions. N Engl J Med 1994 Jun 30;330(26):1895-6.
  6. Sawyer SM, John Fardy H. Bridging the gap between doctors' and patients' expectations of asthma management. J Asthma 2003;40(2):131-8.
  7. Kjær T. A review of the discrete choice experiment-with emphasis on its application in health care. In: Health Economics Papers 2005:1.
  8. Ryan M, Gerard K. Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2003;2(1):55-64.
  9. de Bekker‐Grob EW, Ryan M, Gerard K. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Health Econ 2012;21(2):145-72.
  10. Clark MD, Determann D, Petrou S, Moro D, de Bekker-Grob EW. Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics 2014;32(9):883-902.
  11. Durand C, Eldoma M, Marshall DA, Bansback N, Hazlewood GS. Patient preferences for disease-modifying antirheumatic drug treatment in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. J Rheumatol 2020;47(2):176-87.
  12. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev 2015;4(1):1.
  13. Downes MJ, Brennan ML, Williams HC, Dean RS. Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS). BMJ Open 2016;6(12):e011458.
  14. Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, et al. Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. A product from the ESRC methods programme. 2006;1:b92.
  15. Augustovski F, Beratarrechea A, Irazola V, Rubinstein F, Tesolin P, Gonzalez J, et al. Patient preferences for biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis: a discrete-choice experiment. Value Health 2013;16(2):385-93.
  16. Díaz C, Urruticoechea A, Ivorra J, Cerezo SD, Dilla T, Inciarte-Mundo J, et al. PMS112-PATIENT AND RHEUMATOLOGIST PREFERENCES FOR THE ATTRIBUTES OF RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS TREATMENTS IN SPAIN. A DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENT. Value Health 2018;21:S307.
  17. Harrison M, Bansback N, Spooner L, Koehn C, Hudson M. Preventing Rheumatoid Arthritis (Pre-RA): Preferences of Potential Recipients, Patients, and Health Care Professionals for Preventative Treatment. J Rheumatol 2018;45(7):967.
  18. Hazlewood GS, Bombardier C, Tomlinson G, Thorne C, Bykerk VP, Thompson A, Tin D, Marshall DA. Treatment preferences of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: a discrete-choice experiment. Rheumatology 2016;55(11):1959-68.
  19. Louder AM, Singh A, Saverno K, Cappelleri JC, Aten AJ, Koenig AS, Pasquale MK. Patient preferences regarding rheumatoid arthritis therapies: a conjoint analysis. Am Health Drug Benefits 2016;9(2):84.
  20. Nafees B, Lloyd A, Gaich C, Birt J, Hughes R. Patient Preferences for Biologic Treatments in Rheumatoid Arthritis.: 488. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64.
  21. Poulos C, Hauber AB, González JM, Turpcu A. Patients' willingness to trade off between the duration and frequency of rheumatoid arthritis treatments. Arthritis Care Res 2014;66(7):1008-15.
  22. van Heuckelum M, Mathijssen EG, Vervloet M, Boonen A, Hebing RC, Pasma A, et al. Preferences of patients with rheumatoid arthritis regarding disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: a discrete choice experiment. Patient Preference Adherence 2019;13:1199.
  23. Scalone L, Sarzi-Puttini P, Sinigaglia L, Montecucco C, Giacomelli R, Lapadula G, et al. Patients’, physicians’, nurses’, and pharmacists’ preferences on the characteristics of biologic agents used in the treatment of rheumatic diseases. Patient Preference Adherence 2018;12:2153.
  24. Ho K-A, Acar M, Puig A, Hutas G, Fifer S. What do Australian patients with inflammatory arthritis value in treatment? A discrete choice experiment. Clin Rheumatol 2019:1-13.
  25. Fraenkel L, Nowell WB, Michel G, Wiedmeyer C. Preference phenotypes to facilitate shared decision-making in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77(5):678-83.
  26. Özdemir S, Johnson FR, Hauber AB. Hypothetical bias, cheap talk, and stated willingness to pay for health care. J Health Econ 2009;28(4):894-901.
  27. Skjoldborg US, Lauridsen J, Junker P. Reliability of the discrete choice experiment at the input and output level in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Value Health 2009;12(1):153-8.
  28. Marshall D, Bridges JF, Hauber B, Cameron R, Donnalley L, Fyie K, Johnson FR. Conjoint analysis applications in health—how are studies being designed and reported? Patient 2010;3(4):249-56.
  29. Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, Lloyd A, Prosser LA, Regier DA, Johnson FR, Mauskopf J. Conjoint analysis applications in health—a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health 2011;14(4):403-13.
  30. Rose JM, Bliemer MC. Sample size requirements for stated choice experiments. Transportation 2013;40(5):1021-41.
  31. Webb EJ, Meads D, Eskyte I, King N, Dracup N, Chataway J, et al. A systematic review of discrete-choice experiments and conjoint analysis studies in people with multiple sclerosis. Patient 2018;11(4):391-402.
  32. Veldwijk J, Lambooij MS, de Bekker-Grob EW, Smit HA, de Wit GA. The effect of including an opt-out option in discrete choice experiments. PLoS One 2014;9(11).
  33. Johnson R, Orme B. Getting the most from CBC. Sequim: Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series, Sawtooth Software. 2003.
  34. Lancsar E, Louviere J. Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making. Pharmacoeconomics 2008;26(8):661-677.
  35. de Bekker-Grob EW, Donkers B, Jonker MF, Stolk EA. Sample size requirements for discrete-choice experiments in healthcare: a practical guide. Patient 2015;8(5):373-84.
  36. Apter AJ, Paasche-Orlow MK, Remillard JT, Bennett IM, Ben-Joseph EP, Batista RM, et al. Numeracy and communication with patients: they are counting on us. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23(12):2117-24.
  37. Goldstein DG, Rothschild D. Lay understanding of probability distributions. Judgm Decis Mak 2014;9(1).