Post by Michael Bui

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘀 𝗶𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗰𝗮𝗻'𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗿𝗲-𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘆 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀? Patient preference studies are often resource-intensive to conduct, yet their findings are rarely used beyond the original study purpose. In our review of 𝟳𝟳𝟳 𝗽𝗮𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀, we examined the readiness of the patient preference study landscape for adopting meta-analyses and benefit transfers, i.e., methods that can strengthen the robustness of published preference evidence and support more sustainable use of past research efforts. 🏆 We are proud to share that our paper has been selected as an 𝗘𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿'𝘀 𝗖𝗵𝗼𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 in the upcoming September issue of Value in Health – An HEOR Publication! 𝗞𝗲𝘆 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀: 📊 Most research was concentrated in type 2 diabetes, psoriasis, and multiple sclerosis. Of the 777 included studies, 580 were discrete choice experiments. 🔍 Benefit transfers seemed particularly feasible in type 2 diabetes because of high study volume, consistency in the used elicitation methods, similarities in studied attributes, and reported preference parameters. 💡 Our findings help target the most promising areas for methodological advancements in benefit transfers, paving the way for patient-focused drug development in settings where de novo studies are challenging or infeasible to conduct. A big thank you to all co-authors involved in this study: Karin Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Cecilia Jimenez-Moreno, PhD, Byron Jones, Conny Berlin, Janine van Til HTSR - University of Twente, Kielo Research https://lnkd.in/eP6j5iqF