Evidence mapPaperPMID 30905213Full record

ReviewDrug delivery2019

A portfolio of biologic self-injection devices in rheumatology: how patient involvement in device design can improve treatment experience.

Bart J F van den Bemt, Lynda Gettings, Barbara Domańska, Richard Bruggraber, Irina Mountian, Lars E Kristensen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Drug delivery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 111 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Podcast: Adherence to Injectables.Dermatology and therapy · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Exploiting the potential ofDrug delivery · 2025
    Article
  9. Impact of Handling Perception and Language Barriers on Virologic Response to Daily Subcutaneous Bulevirtide in Hepatitis D.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.

Bart J F van den Bemta Department of Pharmacy , Sint Maartenskliniek , Ubbergen , The Netherlands.
Lynda Gettingsc Insight - Cell to Psychology , Durham , UK.
Barbara Domańskad UCB Pharma , Slough , UK.
Richard Bruggraberd UCB Pharma , Slough , UK.
Irina Mountiane UCB Pharma , Brussels , Belgium.
Lars E Kristensenf The Parker Institute , Copenhagen University Hospital , Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg , Denmark.
UCB Pharma (United Kingdom) · GBFrederiksberg Hospital · DKInsight (China) · CNRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUCB Pharma (Belgium) · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biologic drugs (e.g. anti-tumor necrosis factors) are effective treatments for multiple chronic inflammatory diseases including rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, and psoriatic arthritis. Administration of biologic drugs is usually via subcutaneous self-injection, which provides many patient benefits compared to infusions including increased flexibility, reduced costs, and reduced caregiver burden. However, it is also associated with challenges such as needle phobia, patient treatment misconceptions and incorrect drug administration, and can be impacted by dexterity problems. Evidence suggests these problems, along with other drug administration challenges (e.g. patient forgetfulness, busy lifestyles, and polypharmacy), can reduce patient adherence to treatment. To combat these challenges, patient feedback has been used to develop a range of self-injection devices, including pre-filled syringes, pre-filled pens, and electronic injection devices. Providing different devices for drug administration gives patients the opportunity to choose a device that addresses the challenges they face as an individual. Research suggests involving patients in medical device development, providing patients with a choice of devices and enrolling individuals in patient support programs can empower patients to take control of their treatment journey. By providing a portfolio of self-injection devices, designed based on patient needs, patient experience will improve, potentially improving adherence and hence, long-term treatment outcomes.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntirheumatic AgentsBiological ProductsEquipment DesignHumansInjections, SubcutaneousMedication AdherenceRheumatic DiseasesSelf AdministrationSyringesAntirheumatic AgentsBiological ProductsAnti-TNFelectronic injection devicepre-filled penpre-filled syringeself-injection

Identifiers

PMID30905213
PMCPMC6442222
OpenAlexW2923029572

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.