ArticlePatient preference and adherence2022
Preferences for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus for Medications in Shandong Province, China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide in Chinese participants with type 2 diabetes: Subgroup analyses by baseline characteristics in the PIONEER 11 and 12 randomised controlled trials.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Trial
- Is There Any Difference in Preferences Between Patients and Physicians? Evidence From Anti-Hyperglycemic Medications Choices for Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of diabetes · 2026Article
- Evaluating the Preferences and Willingness-to-Pay for Oral Antidiabetic Drugs Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in China: A Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2024Article
- Preferences of patients with multiple chronic diseases for medication in rural areas of an Eastern Province China: a discrete choice experiment.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate preferences for medications among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from urban community health stations or rural village clinics in Shandong province, China. Methods: We use a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to measure the medication preferences. Each patient completed six DCE choice sets. The attributes for the DCE questionnaire include mode of administration, out-of-pocket medication cost per month, fasting blood glucose control effect and frequency of hypoglycemia events. The conditional logit model (Clogit) and mixed logit model (MXL) were used to evaluate choice data. Results: A total of 887 patients with T2DM completed the survey. The mean age of participants was 64 years, 36.42% experienced complications, and the mean duration of diabetes was about 8 years. Overall, patients' ideal medication would not have hypoglycemia events, provide normal fasting glucose levels, have oral medication three times a day and lower monthly medication cost. Patients prioritized the frequency of hypoglycemia events (β=15.055, P < 0.01) and were willing to spend CNY 393.10 per month to avoid hypoglycemia events. For patients with higher educational levels and with longer diagnosis time, the effect of fasting blood glucose was more relevant than all other outcomes. Conclusion: This study provides information on T2DM patients' preference for medications. Our results suggest that clinical doctors should present patients with a variety of pharmaceutical characteristics and include their preference into medication decision, which will improve patient adherence and health outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.