Understanding patients’ preferences for HIV treatment among rural and urban Colombian patients

Hiligsmann, Mickaël; Cheung, Kei Long

doi:10.1080/13696998.2020.1789153

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, 34 articles were assessed for eligibility. From these, 11 articles were excluded: three were abstracts without full text [ 26 – 28 ], three were review articles focusing on general HIV services [ 14 – 16 ], one study assessed HIV infected pregnant women [ 29 ], one study was repeated publication [ 30 ], one primary study focused on general HIV service [ 31 ], one study assessed General practitioner or HIV clinic appointment [ 32 ], and one study assessed medical and psychosocial support [ 33 ]. Finally, 23 studies were included in the review.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ preferences for antiretroviral therapy service provision: a systematic review

Belay

Yitayal

Atnafu

et al. 2021

Cost Eff Resour Alloc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Achieving global targets of adherence to treatment, retention in care, and treatment success remains a challenge. Health system investment to make antiretroviral therapy services more responsive to patients’ needs and values could address these impediments. Appropriate resource allocation to implement differentiated HIV treatment services demands research evidence. This study aimed to provide an overview of the patients’ preferences for antiretroviral therapy service delivery features. Methods Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and CINAHL) and search engines (Google and Google Scholar) were searched. This review has followed a convergent segregated approach to synthesis and integration. Data from the included studies were systematically extracted, tabulated, and summarised in a narrative review. Studies that analysed preferences for antiretroviral therapy regardless of the method used and published in the English language in any year across the world and HIV positive clients who were 15 years and above on 4th February 2021 were included for this review. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool. A thematic synthesis of the data from the findings section of the main body of the qualitative study was undertaken. ATLAS.ti software version 7 was used for qualitative synthesis. Results From the 1054 retrieved studies, only 23 studies (16 quantitative, three qualitative, and four mixed-methods) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median number of attributes used in all included quantitative studies was 6 (Inter Quartile Range 3). In this review, no study has fulfilled the respective criteria in the methodological quality assessment. In the quantitative synthesis, the majority of participants more valued the outcome, whereas, in the qualitative synthesis, participants preferred more the structure aspect of antiretroviral therapy service. The thematic analysis produced 17 themes, of which ten themes were related to structure, three to process, and four to outcome dimension of Donabedian’s quality of care model. The findings from individual quantitative and qualitative syntheses complement each other. Conclusions In this review, participants’ value for antiretroviral therapy service characteristics varied across included studies. Priorities and values of people living with HIV should be incorporated in the policy, practice, research, and development efforts to improve the quality of antiretroviral therapy service hence avoid poor patient outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ preferences for antiretroviral therapy service provision: a systematic review

Belay

Yitayal

Atnafu

et al. 2021

Cost Eff Resour Alloc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Research Priorities to Increase Confidence in and Acceptance of Health Preference Research: What Questions Should be Prioritized Now?

DiSantostefano,

Smith,

Falahee

et al. 2023

Patient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective There has been an increase in the study and use of stated-preference methods to inform medicine development decisions. The objective of this study was to identify prioritized topics and questions relating to health preferences based on the perspective of members of the preference research community. Methods Preference research stakeholders from industry, academia, consultancy, health technology assessment/regulatory, and patient organizations were recruited using professional networks and preference-targeted e-mail listservs and surveyed about their perspectives on 19 topics and questions for future studies that would increase acceptance of preference methods and their results by decision makers. The online survey consisted of an initial importance prioritization task, a best-worst scaling case 1 instrument, and open-ended questions. Rating counts were used for analysis. The best-worst scaling used a balanced incomplete block design. Results One hundred and one participants responded to the survey invitation with 66 completing the best-worst scaling. The most important research topics related to the synthesis of preferences across studies, transferability across populations or related diseases, and method topics including comparison of methods and non-discrete choice experiment methods. Prioritization differences were found between respondents whose primary affiliation was academia versus other stakeholders. Academic researchers prioritized methodological/less studied topics; other stakeholders prioritized applied research topics relating to consistency of practice. Conclusions As the field of health preference research grows, there is a need to revisit and communicate previous work on preference selection and study design to ensure that new stakeholders are aware of this work and to update these works where necessary. These findings might encourage discussion and alignment among different stakeholders who might hold different research priorities. Research on the application of previous preference research to new contexts will also help increase the acceptance of health preference information by decision makers. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40271-023-00650-x.

show abstract

Comparing the feasibility of four web-based recruitment strategies to evaluate the treatment preferences of rural and urban adults who misuse non-prescribed opioids

Saunders

Budney

Cavazos‐Rehg

et al. 2021

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding patients’ preferences for HIV treatment among rural and urban Colombian patients

Cited by 3 publications

References 11 publications

Patients’ preferences for antiretroviral therapy service provision: a systematic review

Patients’ preferences for antiretroviral therapy service provision: a systematic review

Research Priorities to Increase Confidence in and Acceptance of Health Preference Research: What Questions Should be Prioritized Now?

Comparing the feasibility of four web-based recruitment strategies to evaluate the treatment preferences of rural and urban adults who misuse non-prescribed opioids

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About