↓ Skip to main content

Patient preferences in allergy immunotherapy (AIT) in Germany – a discrete-choice-experiment

Overview of attention for article published in Health Economics Review, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Patient preferences in allergy immunotherapy (AIT) in Germany – a discrete-choice-experiment
Published in
Health Economics Review, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13561-016-0110-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathrin Damm, Janina Volk, Andreas Horn, Jean-Pierre Allam, Ninette Troensegaard-Petersen, Niels Serup-Hansen, Thomas Winkler, Ivonne Thiessen, Kathrin Borchert, Eike G. Wüstenberg, Thomas Mittendorf

Abstract

Allergic Rhinitis (AR) is a common disorder in Europe with Allergic Asthma (AA) as a frequent comorbidity. Allergy immunotherapy (AIT) is the only causal therapy of AR and AA, and can be administered as subcutaneous injections at the physician or as sublingual drops or tablets at home. The usual treatment duration is 3 years. This study aimed to elicit patient preferences to identify the AIT administration mode preferred by patients. A discrete-choice-experiment (DCE) was developed to determine how people weight different treatment options using a paper-based questionnaire from June to September 2014, including 16 study centres. Main inclusion criteria: >18 years, grass, birch and/or house dust mite AR with moderate to severe symptoms, AIT-naïve and AIT-indicated. DCE-attributes were: Administration form, number and duration of physician visits, frequency of life-threatening anaphylactic shocks, local side-effects and co-payments. Two-hundred thirty-nine subjects participated, resulting in analysable 1842 choices. All attributes were significant predictors for the treatment-choice. Ranked by importance, the following first three attributes are most preferred by patients: 1(st) Number and duration of physician visits: Fewer visits with shorter duration preferred (0.658*) 2(nd) Frequency of life-threatening anaphylactic shocks: Lower risk of shocks preferred (0.285*) 3(rd) Local side-effects: Preference for rash/swelling on upper arm over itching/swelling under the tongue (0.210*) (*coefficient-size represents relative importance of the attributes) The most important attribute is the number and duration of visits to a physician. A lower risk of life-threatening anaphylactic shocks was ranked as the second whereas co-payments and administration form play a limited role.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 23%
Other 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 6 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 46%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 5 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2016.
All research outputs
#9,048,695
of 15,442,255 outputs
Outputs from Health Economics Review
#139
of 294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,075
of 266,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Economics Review
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,442,255 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 294 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them