UNASSIGNED: Discrete choice experiment (DCE) and profile case (case 2) best-worst scaling (BWS) present uncertainties regarding the acceptability of quantifying individual healthcare preferences, which may adversely affect the validity of responses and impede the reflection of true healthcare preferences. This study aimed to assess the acceptability of these two methods from the perspective of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and examine their association with specific characteristics of the target population.
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study was based on a nationally representative survey; data were collected using a multistage stratified cluster-sampling procedure between September 2021 and January 2022. Eligible adults with confirmed T2DM voluntarily participated in this study. Participants completed both the DCE and case 2 BWS (BWS-2) choice tasks in random order and provided self-reported assessments of acceptability, including task completion difficulty, comprehension of task complexity, and response preference. Logistic regression and random forest models were used to identify variables associated with acceptability.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 3286 patients with T2DM were included in the study. Respondents indicated there was no statistically significant difference in completion difficulty between the DCE and BWS-2, although the DCE scores were slightly higher (3.07 ± 0.68 vs 3.03 ± 0.67, P = 0.06). However, 1979 (60.2%) respondents found the DCE easier to comprehend. No significant preferences were observed between the two methods (1638 (49.8%) vs 1648 (50.2%)). Sociodemographic factors, such as residence, monthly out-of-pocket costs, and illness duration were significantly associated with comprehension complexity and response preference.
UNASSIGNED: This study yielded contrasting results to most of previous studies, suggesting that DCE may be less cognitively demanding and more suitable for patients with T2DM from the perspective of self-reported acceptability of DCE and BWS. This study promotes a focus on patient acceptability in quantifying individual healthcare preferences to inform tailored optimal stated-preference method for a target population.
Stated preference methodologies such as the discrete choice experiment (DCE) and case 2 best-worst scaling (BWS-2) are gaining popularity as methods for quantifying individual preferences in healthcare. However, the acceptability of the two methods to participants must be considered in practice to reduce cognitive burden and ensure the validity of preference elicitation.DCE was perceived to be less cognitively burdensome than BWS-2. In contrast to patients who thought that DCE was more acceptable, BWS-2 was more accepted by rural patients, patients who lived with the disease for a longer period, and those who had lower monthly out-of-pocket costs.These findings demonstrate potential differences in the acceptability of DCE and BWS-2 for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. To improve efficiency, it would be useful for researchers to consider the optimal stated preference method for identifying target populations according to sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Digital interventions are becoming increasingly popular in rehabilitation. Understanding of device features which impact clinician adoption and satisfaction is limited. Research in the field should be conducted across diverse settings to ensure digital interventions do not exacerbate healthcare inequities.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand rehabilitation clinicians\' preferences regarding device attributes and included a cross-cultural comparison.
METHODS: Choice experiment methodology (best-worst scaling) was used to survey rehabilitation clinicians across Australia and Brazil. Participants completed 10 best-worst questions, choosing the most and least important device attributes from subsets of 31 attributes in a partially balanced block design. Results were analysed using multinomial models by country and latent class. Attribute preference scores (PS) were scaled to 0-100 (least to most important).
RESULTS: A total of 122 clinicians from Brazil and 104 clinicians from Australia completed the survey. Most respondents were physiotherapists (83%) working with neurological populations (51%) in the private/self-employed sector (51%) who had experience using rehabilitation devices (87%). Despite preference heterogeneity across country and work sector (public/not-for-profit versus private/self-employed/other), clinicians consistently prioritised patient outcomes (PS 100.0, 95%CI: 86.2-100.0), patient engagement (PS 93.9, 95%CI: 80.6-94.2), usability (PS 81.3, 95%CI: 68.8-82.5), research evidence (PS 80.4, 95%CI: 68.1-81.7) and risk (PS 75.7, 95%CI: 63.8-77.3). In Australia, clinicians favoured device attributes which facilitate increased therapy dosage (PS 79.2, 95%CI: 62.6-81.1) and encourage patient independent practice (PS 66.8, 95%CI: 52.0-69.2). In Brazil, clinicians preferred attributes enabling device use for providing clinical data (PS 67.6, 95%CI: 51.8-70.9) and conducting clinical assessments (PS 65.6, 95%CI: 50.2-68.8).
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians prioritise patients\' needs and practical application over technical aspects of digital rehabilitation devices. Contextual factors shape clinician preferences rather than individual clinician characteristics. Future device design and research should consider preferences and influences, involving diverse stakeholders to account for context-driven variations across cultures and healthcare settings.

UNASSIGNED: To determine the perspective of patients and professionals in Assisted Reproduction Units (ARU) on the importance of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) compared to other elective procedures, to highlight the relevance of ART as an elective procedure and the impact of delayed interventions on patients.
UNASSIGNED: An observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, online survey-based study was conducted in infertility patients and partners (n=98) and ARU healthcare professionals (n=83). The survey included a best-worst scaling (BWS) experiment and an ad-hoc questionnaire to analyze the pandemic impact on ART management and infertility patients in Spain. In the BWS, each respondent established priorities choosing which patient profile should be rated as the highest and lowest priority profile on a waiting list. To understand the importance that they give to assisted reproduction compared to other procedures, three very common elective procedures involving different patient profiles were selected: cataract surgery, knee arthroplasty, and varicose vein surgery. For each procedure, three hypothetical patient profiles corresponding to three different degrees of severity on a waiting list were designed.
UNASSIGNED: Patients attributed greater importance to ART profiles (BWS score: patients 0.14 vs professionals -0.05; p<0.01) whereas professionals prioritized cataract surgery (patients 0.06 vs professionals 0.23; p<0.01). Concerning the profile severity, more severe profiles were prioritized in all procedures by both groups. Patients\' and professionals\' perspectives on the impact of the pandemic were similar, with exceptions: information received for resuming ART; health care provision in crisis situations; and reduction of parenting options. The pandemic affected patients\' ability to conceive a child (70.4% of those surveyed), their psychological well-being (75.5%), and partner, social, and work relationships (69.4%).
UNASSIGNED: Preference studies involving patients and professionals can provide important information to define framework criteria for the management of waiting lists for elective procedures, and to prioritize interventions during pandemic periods. The pandemic impact on infertility patients highlights the relevance of developing measures and strategies to cope with similar future situations in the most appropriate way.

Smartphone apps have been beneficial in controlling and preventing the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is a gap in research surrounding the importance of smartphone app functions from a user\'s perspective. Although the insights and opinions of different stakeholders, such as policymakers and medical professionals, can influence the success of a public health policy, any strategy will face difficulty in achieving the expected effect if it is not based on a method that users can accept.
This study aimed to assess the importance of a hypothetical smartphone app\'s functions for managing health during a pandemic based on the perspective of user preferences.
A cross-sectional and web-based survey using the best-worst scaling (BWS) method was used to investigate the general population\'s preferences for important smartphone app functions. Participants were recruited from a professional surveying company\'s web-based surveying panel. The attributes of the BWS questionnaire were developed based on a robust process, including literature review, interviews, and expert discussion. A balanced incomplete block design was used to construct the choice task to ensure the effectiveness of the research design. Count analysis, conditional logit model analysis, and mixed logit analysis were used to estimate preference heterogeneity among respondents.
The responses of 2153 participants were eligible for analysis. Nearly 55% (1192/2153) were female, and the mean age was 31.4 years. Most participants (1765/2153, 81.9%) had completed tertiary or higher education, and approximately 70% (1523/2153) were urban residents. The 3 most vital functions according to their selection were \"surveillance and monitoring of infected cases,\" \"quick self-screening,\" and \"early detection of infected cases.\" The mixed logit regression model identified significant heterogeneity in preferences among respondents, and stratified analysis showed that some heterogeneities varied in respondents by demographics and COVID-19-related characteristics. Participants who preferred to use the app were more likely to assign a high weight to the preventive functions than those who did not prefer to use it. Conversely, participants who showed lower willingness to use the app tended to indicate a higher preference for supportive functions than those who preferred to use it.
This study ranks the importance of smartphone app features that provide health care services during a pandemic based on the general population\'s preferences in China. It provides empirical evidence for decision-makers to develop eHealth policies and strategies that address future public health crises from a person-centered care perspective. Continued use of apps and smart investment in digital health can help improve health outcomes and reduce the burden of disease on individuals and communities.

Patient preferences for the content and format of prescription medication labels (PMLs, i.e., sticker labels placed on medication bottles/packets at dispensing) have been extensively studied. However, accommodating all preferences on PMLs is impractical due to space limitations. Understanding how patients prioritise the content and format attributes of PMLs can inform improvements while working within PML space constraints.
We aimed to (1) identify a ranking of medication-related content attributes to be prioritised on PMLs using best-worst scaling (BWS), and (2) determine the relative importance of format attributes when incorporated onto PMLs using discrete choice experiment (DCE), from the perspective of older adult patients in Singapore.
Attributes were informed by our prior qualitative study and PML best practice guidelines. For the BWS component, the assessed content attributes were indication, precautions, interaction or paired medicines, food instructions, side effects, expiry date, and missed dose action, all of which are currently not legally mandated on PMLs in Singapore. A BWS object case was used to rank the content attributes. For the DCE component, in a series of questions, participants were asked to choose between two PML options each time, that varied in the presentation of dosage-frequency instructions, font size, presentation of dosage, presentation of precautions, and font colour of precautions. A mixed logit model estimated the relative utilities of format attribute levels, enabling the calculation of importance scores of the format attributes.
The study recruited 280 participants (mean age: 68.8 ± 5.4 years). The three most-preferred content attributes were indication, precautions and interaction or paired medicines. The top three format preferences were tabular style presentation of dosage-frequency instructions, large font size and precautions in red colour.
Healthcare institutions should consider improving their PMLs based on the leading content and format preferences voiced by older adult patients. The methodology adopted in the study can also be used for aligning the content and format of other patient education materials with patient preferences.

Innovative technology-based solutions have the potential to improve access to clinically proven interventions for cannabis use disorder (CUD) in individuals with first episode psychosis (FEP). High patient engagement with app-based interventions is critical for achieving optimal outcomes. 104 individuals 18 to 35 years old with FEP and CUD from three Canadian provinces completed an electronic survey to evaluate preferences for online psychological intervention intensity, participation autonomy, feedback related to cannabis use, and technology platforms and app functionalities. The development of the questionnaire was informed by a qualitative study that included patients and clinicians. We used Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) and item ranking methodologies to measure preferences. Conditional logistic regression models for BWS data revealed high preferences for moderate intervention intensity (e.g., modules with a length of 15 min) and treatment autonomy that included preferences for using technology-based interventions and receiving feedback related to cannabis use once a week. Luce regression models for rank items revealed high preferences for smartphone-based apps, video intervention components, and having access to synchronous communications with clinicians and gamification elements. Results informed the development of iCanChange (iCC), a smartphone-based intervention for the treatment of CUD in individuals with FEP that is undergoing clinical testing.

Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is associated with poor outcomes and is generally incurable. Therefore, understanding preferences of older adults with AML is critical. We sought to assess whether best-worst scaling (BWS) can be used to capture attributes considered by older adults with AML when making initial treatment decisions and longitudinally, as well as assess changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and decisional regret over time.
In a longitudinal study for adults ≥60 years with newly diagnosed AML, we collected: (1) attributes of treatment most important to patients using BWS, (2) HRQoL using EQ-5D-5L, (3) decisional regret using the Decisional Regret Scale, and (4) treatment worthiness using the \"Was it worth it?\" questionnaire. Data was collected at baseline and over six months. A hierarchical Bayes model was used to allocate percentages out of 100%. Due to small sample size, hypothesis testing was performed at α = 0.10 (2-tailed). We analyzed how these measures differed by treatment choice (intensive vs. lower intensity treatment).
Mean age of patients was 76 years (n = 15). At baseline, the most important attributes of treatment to patients were response to treatment (i.e., chance that the cancer will respond to treatment; 20.9%). Compared to those who received lower intensity treatment (n = 7) or best supportive care (n = 2), those who received intensive treatment (n = 6) generally ranked \"alive one year or more after treatment\" (p = 0.03) with higher importance and ranked \"daily activities\" (p = 0.01) and \"location of treatment\" (p = 0.01) with less importance. Overall, HRQoL scores were high. Decisional regret was mild overall and lower for patients who chose intensive treatment (p = 0.06).
We demonstrated that BWS can be used to assess the importance of various treatment attributes considered by older adults with AML when making initial treatment decisions and longitudinally throughout treatment. Attributes of treatment important to older patients with AML differed between treatment groups and changed over time. Interventions are needed to re-assess patient priorities throughout treatment to ensure care aligns with patient preferences.

UNASSIGNED: Acid sphingomyelinase deficiency (ASMD) is a rare, progressive, and potentially fatal disease affecting major organs; its symptoms present heterogeneously. Data on the most bothersome symptoms for patients with ASMD types B or A/B and their caregivers or parents are limited. We conducted a survey to quantify the relative impact of potential ASMD symptoms and risks for patients and parents/caregivers.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty respondents, recruited via National Niemann-Pick Disease Foundation (United States) and Niemann-Pick United Kingdom, took a preference survey: 11 patients who had a self-reported diagnosis of ASMD types B or A/B and 9 parents who had a child with ASMD types B or A/B. Using object-case best-worst scaling, we explored the most and least bothersome among a set of 15 ASMD symptoms/risks selected based on clinical input and qualitative research with patients and caregivers. In 15 experimentally designed questions containing five items each, respondents ranked the symptoms/risks, irrespective of their experiences with them. Data were analyzed using a conditional multinomial logit model.
UNASSIGNED: Patients reported constant abdominal pain, severe pain in bones and joints, and severe fatigue to be the most bothersome potential symptoms or risks, followed by a chance of bleeding in the spleen. The next most bothersome potential symptom was constant shortness of breath. Easy bruising and noticeable abdominal enlargement were among the least bothersome symptoms. The most bothersome symptom for parents was bleeding in the spleen.
UNASSIGNED: Patients and parents had similar perceptions of the most bothersome potential symptoms/risks. Despite the small sample size typical of rare disease studies, understanding patient preferences is important for such diseases and can inform shared decision-making.

UNASSIGNED: Combination intranasal corticosteroid and antihistamine sprays are a first-line treatment option for allergic rhinitis (AR), of which Azelastine Hydrochloride and Fluticasone Propionate nasal spray (AZE/FLU; Dymista®), and Olopatadine Hydrochloride and Mometasone Furoate Monohydrate nasal spray (OLO/MOM; Ryaltris®) are currently registered in Australia. As it is not known how patients value treatment attributes of current combination nasal sprays, this observational, real-world clinical study aimed to understand patients\' satisfaction with, and importance of, treatment attributes of OLO/MOM and AZE/FLU using an Anchored Best-Worst Scaling (ABWS) exercise.
UNASSIGNED: Four hundred and twenty-six adults in Australia with moderate to severe AR using either OLO/MOM or AZE/FLU completed an online survey incorporating an ABWS with 11 domains: 7 sensory (immediate taste of medication, aftertaste of medication, smell of medication, irritation to your nose, urge to sneeze, dripping out your nose/down your throat, dryness of your nose/throat) and 4 treatment-related (convenience, fast acting, duration of effect, and AR symptom control). The ABWS involved rescaling individual BWS scores using anchored ratings (0-10) for most and least satisfied/important domains to create a total satisfaction index (TSI) (0-100) to be compared across groups. Statistical comparisons were completed using ANOVA (TSI) and MANOVA (individual domains).
UNASSIGNED: Participants using OLO/MOM (M = 68.26, SE = 1.39) had significantly higher TSI than participants using AZE/FLU (M=62.78, SE = 0.70) (p < 0.001), significantly higher satisfaction on 7 of 11 domains and regarded 8 of 11 domains as significantly more important compared to participants using AZE/FLU (all p < 0.05). Preferred domains were predominantly sensory attributes.
UNASSIGNED: Current findings showed that participants using OLO/MOM were more satisfied with their overall treatment compared to participants using AZE/FLU, particularly with sensory attributes, thus highlighting the suitability of OLO/MOM for people with AR who value sensory attributes. Prescribers of AR treatments are encouraged to discuss treatment attributes with patients to facilitate shared decision-making.

To elicit the relative importance of the benefits and harms of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among potential screening participants in the Dutch population.
In a consensus meeting with 11 experts, risk reduction of CRC and CRC deaths (benefits) and complications from colonoscopy, stress of receiving positive fecal immunological test (FIT) results, as well as false-positive and false-negative FIT results (harms) were selected as determinant end points to consider during decision making. We conducted an online best-worst scaling survey among adults aged 55 to 75 years from the Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel of The Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research to elicit preference values for these outcomes. The preference values were estimated using conditional logit regression.
Of 265 participants, 234 (89%) had ever participated in CRC screening. Compared with the stress of receiving a positive FIT result, the outcome perceived most important was the risk of CRC death (odds ratio [OR] 4.5; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.9-5.1), followed by risk of CRC (OR 4.1; 95% CI 3.6-4.7), a false-negative FIT result (OR 3.1; 95% CI 2.7-3.5), colonoscopy complications (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.8), and a false-positive FIT result (OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.3-1.6). The magnitude of these differences in perceived importance varied according to age, educational level, ethnic background, and whether the individual had previously participated in CRC screening.
Dutch men and women eligible for FIT-based CRC screening perceive the benefits of screening to be more important than the harms.