Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35378644›Full record

SynthesisArchives of osteoporosis2022

A Qualitative Study to Assess US Patient Preferences between new Transdermal System and Injectable Anabolic Therapies for Osteoporosis Treatment.

Charlotte Beaudart, Stuart Silverman, Deborah T Gold, Setareh A Williams, Rich Weiss, Mickael Hiligsmann

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of osteoporosis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Treatment patterns in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis using abaloparatide: a real-world observational study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Observational
  4. 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 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Charlotte BeaudartDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, 6229, GT, Maastricht, the Netherlands. c.beaudart@maastrichtuniversity.nl.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0827-5303
Stuart SilvermanCedars-Sinai, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Deborah T GoldDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Setareh A WilliamsRadius Health, Inc., Boston, MA, USA.
Rich WeissRadius Health, Inc., Boston, MA, USA.
Mickael HiligsmannDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Duboisdomein 30, 6229, GT, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLRadius Health (United States) · USCedars-Sinai Medical Center · USDuke Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

US patients with osteoporosis included in three focus groups identified efficacy, safety, cost, and convenience as important attributes of treatment when choosing between anabolic therapies with high stated preference for the solid Microstructured Transdermal System.

objectiveThe current study evaluated patient perspective and relative importance of treatment attributes of in-home daily self-administration of abaloparatide-solid Microstructured Transdermal System (sMTS) compared with other anabolic agents (i.e. in-home daily subcutaneous self-injections, and monthly subcutaneous injections at doctor office) among a group of US patients with osteoporosis.

methodsThe current study included systematic literature reviews, experts' consultation and three online patients focus groups (n=27), including patients ≥50 years of age at high risk for fracture. Nominal Group Technique was used by asking patients to (1) Individually identify characteristics that would be important for them when choosing between anabolic treatments, (2) Share ideas and discuss perspectives with other patients, (3) Review additional attributes generated from a systematic literature review, (4) Select and rank individually the 7 most important characteristics from the list and (5) Report their acceptability and stated preference ranking between the three treatment options.

resultsTwenty women and 7 men with a mean age of 65 (range 51-85 years) participated in the focus groups. Twenty-four treatment characteristics were identified through focus groups and literature review. Efficacy, safety, out-of-pocket costs, strength of evidence and the option to self-administer were ranked as the most important attributes. The majority of patients stated preference for a daily sMTS if prescribed by their doctor.

conclusionsThis study revealed that efficacy, safety, costs, and convenience are important attributes of osteoporosis treatment for US patients at high risk for fractures when choosing between anabolic therapies, with a high stated preference for sMTS.

Indexed as

Fractures, BoneOsteoporosisAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansInjections, SubcutaneousMaleMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceQualitative Researchanabolic treatmentfocus groupsfractureosteoporosisqualitative researchstated preference

Identifiers

PMID35378644
PMCPMC8979159
OpenAlexW4225957981

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.