| Title |
Evaluating preferences for profiles of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists among injection-naive type 2 diabetes patients in Japan
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s109289 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heather L Gelhorn, Elizabeth D Bacci, Jiat Ling Poon, Kristina S Boye, Shuichi Suzuki, Steven M Babineaux |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study was to use a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to estimate patients' preferences for the treatment features, safety, and efficacy of two specific glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, dulaglutide and liraglutide, among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Japan. In Japan, patients with self-reported T2DM and naive to treatment with self-injectable medications were administered a DCE through an in-person interview. The DCE examined the following six attributes of T2DM treatment, each described by two levels: "dosing frequency", "hemoglobin A1c change", "weight change", "type of delivery system", "frequency of nausea", and "frequency of hypoglycemia". Part-worth utilities were estimated using logit models and were used to calculate the relative importance (RI) of each attribute. A chi-square test was used to determine the differences in preferences for the dulaglutide versus liraglutide profiles. The final evaluable sample consisted of 182 participants (mean age: 58.9 [standard deviation =10.0] years; 64.3% male; mean body mass index: 26.1 [standard deviation =5.0] kg/m(2)). The RI values for the attributes in rank order were dosing frequency (44.1%), type of delivery system (26.3%), frequency of nausea (15.1%), frequency of hypoglycemia (7.4%), weight change (6.2%), and hemoglobin A1c change (1.0%). Significantly more participants preferred the dulaglutide profile (94.5%) compared to the liraglutide profile (5.5%; P<0.0001). This study elicited the preferences of Japanese T2DM patients for attributes and levels representing the actual characteristics of two existing glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. In this comparison, dosing frequency and type of delivery system were the two most important characteristics, accounting for >70% of the RI. These findings are similar to those of a previous UK study, providing information about patients' preferences that may be informative for patient-clinician treatment discussions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 6 | 24% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 28% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 24% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,443,636
of 25,593,129 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,067
of 1,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,452
of 367,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#44
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,593,129 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,768 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.