↓ Skip to main content

Patient preferences for palliative treatment of locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: a choice-based conjoint analysis study from Germany

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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 for palliative treatment of locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: a choice-based conjoint analysis study from Germany
Published in
BMC Cancer, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12885-016-2975-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

R. Hofheinz, J. Clouth, J. Borchardt-Wagner, U. Wagner, E. Weidling, M. H. Jen, P. Brück

Abstract

Decisions on palliative chemotherapy (CT) for locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer (mGC) require trade-offs between potential benefits and risks for patients. Healthcare providers and payers agree that patient-preferences should be considered. We conducted a choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis study in pre-treated patients from Germany with mGC or locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (mGEJ-Ca), to evaluate their preferences when hypothetically selecting a CT regimen. German oncologists and gastroenterologists were contacted to identify patients with mGC or mGEJ-Ca who had completed ≥2 cycles of palliative CT in first or later lines of therapy (CT ongoing or complete). The primary objective was to quantify patient preferences for palliative CT by CBC analysis. Six in-depth qualitative interviews identified 3 attributes: treatment tolerability, quality of life in terms of ability of self-care, and additional survival benefit. The CBC matrix was constructed with 4 factor levels per attribute and each participant was presented with 15 different iterations of these levels. A minimum of 50 participants was needed. Consenting patients completed the CBC survey, choosing systematically among profiles. CBC models were estimated by multinomial logistic regression (MLR) and hierarchical Bayesian (HB) analysis. Estimates of importance for each attribute and factor-level were calculated. Fifty-five patients participated in the CBC survey (78.2% male, median age 63 years, 81.8% currently receiving CT). Across this sample, low treatment toxicity was ranked highest (44.6% relative importance, MLR analysis), followed by ability to self-care (32.3%), and an additional survival benefit of up to 3 months (3 months 23.1%, 2 months 18.3%, 1 month 11.2%). The MLR analysis showed high validity (certainty 37.9%, chi square p < 0.01, root-likelihood 0.505). The HB analysis yielded similar results. Patients' preferences related to a new hypothetical palliative CT of mGC or mGEJ-Ca can be assessed by CBCanalysis. Although in real-life, patients initially need to decide on CT before they have any experience, and patients' varied experiences with CT will have impacted specific responses, low toxicity and self-care ability were considered as most important by this group of patients with mGC or mGEJ-Ca.

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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Other 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 19%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 13 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,183,078
of 11,841,124 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,343
of 4,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,045
of 327,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#32
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,841,124 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,335 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
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 327,043 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.