{"title":"Disutilities of treatment-related attributes for type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.","authors":"Shitong Xie, Xinran Liu, Meixuan Li, Jing Wu","doi":"10.1007/s11136-025-03945-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To synthesize the literature on eliciting disutilities associated with treatment-related attributes in type 2 diabetes (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, EconLit and CINAHL databases from inception to December, 2024. This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines, quality and risk of bias of the included studies were assessed using the NICE and ROBINS-I checklist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies involving 59 to 4060 participants were included and most studies (n=6) were conducted in the UK. The perspective of preference included T2DM patients (n=7) and the general public (n=3), with one study included both. Elicitation approaches used were time trade-off (n=5) and standard gamble (n=4). Eight treatment-related attributes were identified, including weight change (n=5), dosing frequency (n=4), gastrointestinal side effects (n=2), flexible dosing (n=2), administration requirement (i.e., reconstitution, waiting, and needle handling) (n=2), injection site reaction (n=1), fear of hypoglycemia (n=1), and HbA1c levels (n=1). For the attribute of weight change, the (dis)utility value ranged from -0.106 to 0.047. Respondents showed a preference for weekly over daily administration (range: 0.023 to 0.095), once-daily over multiple-daily (range: 0.015 to 0.123). The (dis)utility values for the rest of six attributes ranged from -0.04 to 0.034.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This review provides evidence synthesize of published disutilities related to T2DM treatment-related attributes which have a nonnegligible effect. Weight change and dosing frequency were the most reported with the largest impact. Given the considerable heterogeneity in current studies, care should be taken in selecting appropriate estimates between different elicitation methods, populations and countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":20748,"journal":{"name":"Quality of Life Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality of Life Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-025-03945-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To synthesize the literature on eliciting disutilities associated with treatment-related attributes in type 2 diabetes (T2DM).
Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, EconLit and CINAHL databases from inception to December, 2024. This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines, quality and risk of bias of the included studies were assessed using the NICE and ROBINS-I checklist.
Results: Nine studies involving 59 to 4060 participants were included and most studies (n=6) were conducted in the UK. The perspective of preference included T2DM patients (n=7) and the general public (n=3), with one study included both. Elicitation approaches used were time trade-off (n=5) and standard gamble (n=4). Eight treatment-related attributes were identified, including weight change (n=5), dosing frequency (n=4), gastrointestinal side effects (n=2), flexible dosing (n=2), administration requirement (i.e., reconstitution, waiting, and needle handling) (n=2), injection site reaction (n=1), fear of hypoglycemia (n=1), and HbA1c levels (n=1). For the attribute of weight change, the (dis)utility value ranged from -0.106 to 0.047. Respondents showed a preference for weekly over daily administration (range: 0.023 to 0.095), once-daily over multiple-daily (range: 0.015 to 0.123). The (dis)utility values for the rest of six attributes ranged from -0.04 to 0.034.
Conclusions: This review provides evidence synthesize of published disutilities related to T2DM treatment-related attributes which have a nonnegligible effect. Weight change and dosing frequency were the most reported with the largest impact. Given the considerable heterogeneity in current studies, care should be taken in selecting appropriate estimates between different elicitation methods, populations and countries.
期刊介绍:
Quality of Life Research is an international, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the rapid communication of original research, theoretical articles and methodological reports related to the field of quality of life, in all the health sciences. The journal also offers editorials, literature, book and software reviews, correspondence and abstracts of conferences.
Quality of life has become a prominent issue in biometry, philosophy, social science, clinical medicine, health services and outcomes research. The journal''s scope reflects the wide application of quality of life assessment and research in the biological and social sciences. All original work is subject to peer review for originality, scientific quality and relevance to a broad readership.
This is an official journal of the International Society of Quality of Life Research.