BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Janssen EM, Segal JB, Bridges JFP. A Framework for Instrument Development of a Choice Experiment: An Application to Type 2 Diabetes. Patient 2016;9:465-79. [DOI: 10.1007/s40271-016-0170-3] [Cited by in Crossref: 43] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42] [Article Influence: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 von Weinrich P, Kong Q, Liu Y. Would you zoom with your doctor? A discrete choice experiment to identify patient preferences for video and in-clinic consultations in German primary care. J Telemed Telecare 2022;:1357633X221111975. [PMID: 35915997 DOI: 10.1177/1357633X221111975] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Halton C, Duane B, Batey AC, Wong J, Corley A, Hart F, Koh J, Johnston B. How much do consumers consider sustainability when purchasing a toothbrush? A discrete choice experiment. Br Dent J 2022;233:327-32. [PMID: 36028698 DOI: 10.1038/s41415-022-4914-2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Hinwood M, Wall L, Lang D, Balogh ZJ, Smith A, Dowsey M, Clarke P, Choong P, Bunzli S, Paolucci F. Patient and clinician characteristics and preferences for increasing participation in placebo surgery trials: a scoping review of attributes to inform a discrete choice experiment. Trials 2022;23:296. [PMID: 35413876 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06277-x] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Brown A, Jones S, Yim J. Health preference research: An overview for medical radiation sciences. J Med Radiat Sci 2022. [PMID: 35388630 DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.580] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Brouwers J, Cox B, Van Wilder A, Claessens F, Bruyneel L, De Ridder D, Eeckloo K, Vanhaecht K. The future of hospital quality of care policy: A multi-stakeholder discrete choice experiment in Flanders, Belgium. Health Policy 2021;125:1565-73. [PMID: 34689980 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2021.10.008] [Reference Citation Analysis]
6 Wu A, Radhakrishnan V, Targan E, Scarella TM, Torous J, Hill KP. Self-Reported Preferences for Help-Seeking and Barriers to Using Mental Health Supports Among Internal Medicine Residents: Exploratory Use of an Econometric Best-Worst Scaling Framework for Gathering Physician Wellness Preferences. JMIR Med Educ 2021;7:e28623. [PMID: 34612838 DOI: 10.2196/28623] [Reference Citation Analysis]
7 Tsai JH, Crossnohere NL, Strong T, Bridges JFP. Measuring Meaningful Benefit-Risk Tradeoffs to Promote Patient-Focused Drug Development in Prader-Willi Syndrome: A Discrete-Choice Experiment. MDM Policy Pract 2021;6:23814683211039457. [PMID: 34497876 DOI: 10.1177/23814683211039457] [Reference Citation Analysis]
8 Webb EJD, Meads D, Eskytė I, Ford HL, Bekker HL, Chataway J, Pepper G, Marti J, Okan Y, Pavitt SH, Schmierer K, Manzano A. The Impact of Reproductive Issues on Preferences of Women with Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis for Disease-Modifying Treatments. Patient 2020;13:583-97. [PMID: 32588337 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-020-00429-4] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
9 Peters Y, Siersema PD. Public Preferences and Predicted Uptake for Esophageal Cancer Screening Strategies: A Labeled Discrete Choice Experiment. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2020;11:e00260. [PMID: 33105164 DOI: 10.14309/ctg.0000000000000260] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
10 Collacott H, Soekhai V, Thomas C, Brooks A, Brookes E, Lo R, Mulnick S, Heidenreich S. A Systematic Review of Discrete Choice Experiments in Oncology Treatments. Patient 2021. [PMID: 33950476 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00520-4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
11 Kim HY, Hanrahan CF, Dowdy DW, Martinson NA, Golub JE, Bridges JFP. Priorities among HIV-positive individuals for tuberculosis preventive therapies. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 2020;24:396-402. [PMID: 32317063 DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.18.0740] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
12 Janse S, Janssen E, Huwig T, Basu Roy U, Ferris A, Presley CJ, Bridges JFP. Line of therapy and patient preferences regarding lung cancer treatment: a discrete-choice experiment. Curr Med Res Opin 2021;37:643-53. [PMID: 33571024 DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2021.1888707] [Reference Citation Analysis]
13 Hollin IL, Janssen E, Kelley MA, Bridges JFP. Do people have differing motivations for participating in a stated-preference study? Results from a latent-class analysis. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2021;21:44. [PMID: 33549068 DOI: 10.1186/s12911-021-01412-1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
14 Webb EJD, Meads D, Lynch Y, Judge S, Randall N, Goldbart J, Meredith S, Moulam L, Hess S, Murray J. Attribute Selection for a Discrete Choice Experiment Incorporating a Best-Worst Scaling Survey. Value Health 2021;24:575-84. [PMID: 33840436 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.025] [Reference Citation Analysis]
15 Chetty-Makkan CM, Hoffmann CJ, Charalambous S, Botha C, Ntshuntshe S, Nkosi N, Kim HY. Youth Preferences for HIV Testing in South Africa: Findings from the Youth Action for Health (YA4H) Study Using a Discrete Choice Experiment. AIDS Behav 2021;25:182-90. [PMID: 32607914 DOI: 10.1007/s10461-020-02960-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
16 Pearce A, Harrison M, Watson V, Street DJ, Howard K, Bansback N, Bryan S. Respondent Understanding in Discrete Choice Experiments: A Scoping Review. Patient 2021;14:17-53. [PMID: 33141359 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-020-00467-y] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
17 Chachoua L, Dabbous M, François C, Dussart C, Aballéa S, Toumi M. Use of Patient Preference Information in Benefit-Risk Assessment, Health Technology Assessment, and Pricing and Reimbursement Decisions: A Systematic Literature Review of Attempts and Initiatives. Front Med (Lausanne) 2020;7:543046. [PMID: 33195294 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2020.543046] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
18 Sommer J, Dyczmons J, Grobosch S, Gontscharuk V, Vomhof M, Roden M, Icks A. Preferences of people with type 2 diabetes for telemedical lifestyle programmes in Germany: protocol of a discrete choice experiment. BMJ Open 2020;10:e036995. [PMID: 32907900 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036995] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
19 Tegenge MA, Belov A, Moncur M, Forshee R, Irony T. Comparing clotting factors attributes across different methods of preference elicitation in haemophilia patients. Haemophilia 2020;26:817-25. [PMID: 32842165 DOI: 10.1111/hae.14119] [Reference Citation Analysis]
20 Shields GE, Brown L, Wells A, Capobianco L, Vass C. Utilising Patient and Public Involvement in Stated Preference Research in Health: Learning from the Existing Literature and a Case Study. Patient 2021;14:399-412. [PMID: 32748242 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-020-00439-2] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
21 Janssen EM, Dy SM, Meara AS, Kneuertz PJ, Presley CJ, Bridges JFP. Analysis of Patient Preferences in Lung Cancer - Estimating Acceptable Tradeoffs Between Treatment Benefit and Side Effects. Patient Prefer Adherence 2020;14:927-37. [PMID: 32581519 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S235430] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
22 Clearfield E, Tambor E, Janssen EM, Messner DA. Increasing the Patient-Centeredness of Health Economics and Outcomes Research Through Patient Engagement in Core Outcome Set Development. Patient 2021;14:413-20. [PMID: 32447607 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-020-00424-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
23 Lewis HB, Schroeder M, Gunsoy NB, Janssen EM, Llewellyn S, Doll HA, Jones PW, Ismaila AS. Evaluating Patient Preferences of Maintenance Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Discrete Choice Experiment in the UK, USA and Germany. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2020;15:595-604. [PMID: 32256060 DOI: 10.2147/COPD.S221980] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
24 Wall L, Hinwood M, Lang D, Smith A, Bunzli S, Clarke P, Choong PFM, Dowsey MM, Paolucci F. Attitudes of patients and surgeons towards sham surgery trials: a protocol for a scoping review of attributes to inform a discrete choice experiment. BMJ Open 2020;10:e035870. [PMID: 32161162 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035870] [Reference Citation Analysis]
25 Hollin IL, Craig BM, Coast J, Beusterien K, Vass C, Disantostefano R, Peay H. Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers. Patient 2020;13:121-36. [DOI: 10.1007/s40271-019-00401-x] [Cited by in Crossref: 34] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 29] [Article Influence: 11.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
26 Bridges JF, la Cruz M, Pavilack M, Flood E, Janssen EM, Chehab N, Fernandes AW. Patient preferences for attributes of tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatments for EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Future Oncol 2019;15:3895-907. [PMID: 31621403 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2019-0396] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
27 Kim HY, Dowdy DW, Martinson NA, E Golub J, Bridges JFP, Hanrahan CF. Maternal priorities for preventive therapy among HIV-positive pregnant women before and after delivery in South Africa: a best-worst scaling survey. J Int AIDS Soc 2018;21:e25143. [PMID: 29972628 DOI: 10.1002/jia2.25143] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
28 Aizaki H, Fogarty J. An R package and tutorial for case 2 best–worst scaling. Journal of Choice Modelling 2019;32:100171. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2019.100171] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
29 Goodwin E, Boddy K, Tatnell L, Hawton A. Involving Members of the Public in Health Economics Research: Insights from Selecting Health States for Valuation to Estimate Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) Weights. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2018;16:187-94. [PMID: 29047072 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-017-0355-5] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
30 Katz DA, Stewart KR, Paez M, Vander Weg MW, Grant KM, Hamlin C, Gaeth G. Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) Questionnaire to Understand Veterans' Preferences for Tobacco Treatment in Primary Care. Patient 2018;11:649-63. [PMID: 29855976 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-018-0316-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
31 Barber S, Bekker H, Marti J, Pavitt S, Khambay B, Meads D. Development of a Discrete-Choice Experiment (DCE) to Elicit Adolescent and Parent Preferences for Hypodontia Treatment. Patient 2019;12:137-48. [PMID: 30367434 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-018-0338-0] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
32 Zhou M, Bridges JF. Explore preference heterogeneity for treatment among people with Type 2 diabetes: A comparison of random-parameters and latent-class estimation techniques. Journal of Choice Modelling 2019;30:38-49. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2018.11.002] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
33 de Freitas HM, Ito T, Hadi M, Al-Jassar G, Henry-Szatkowski M, Nafees B, Lloyd AJ. Patient Preferences for Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer Treatments: A Discrete Choice Experiment Among Men in Three European Countries. Adv Ther 2019;36:318-32. [PMID: 30617763 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-018-0861-3] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
34 Whitty JA, Oliveira Gonçalves AS. A Systematic Review Comparing the Acceptability, Validity and Concordance of Discrete Choice Experiments and Best-Worst Scaling for Eliciting Preferences in Healthcare. Patient 2018;11:301-17. [PMID: 29177797 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0288-y] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
35 Tsai JH, Scheimann AO, McCandless SE, Strong TV, Bridges JFP. Caregiver priorities for endpoints to evaluate treatments for Prader-Willi syndrome: a best-worst scaling. J Med Econ 2018;21:1230-7. [PMID: 30256699 DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2018.1528980] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
36 Oakes AH, Garmo VS, Bone LR, Longo DR, Segal JB, Bridges JFP. Identifying and Prioritizing the Barriers and Facilitators to the Self-Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Community-Centered Approach. Patient 2017;10:773-83. [PMID: 28510080 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0248-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
37 Janssen EM, Benz HL, Tsai J, Bridges JF. Identifying and prioritizing concerns associated with prosthetic devices for use in a benefit-risk assessment: a mixed-methods approach. Expert Review of Medical Devices 2018;15:385-98. [DOI: 10.1080/17434440.2018.1470505] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
38 Tsai JH, Janssen E, Bridges JF. Research as an event: a novel approach to promote patient-focused drug development. Patient Prefer Adherence 2018;12:673-9. [PMID: 29765204 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S153875] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
39 Bridges JF, Oakes AH, Reinhart CA, Voyard E, O'Donoghue B. Developing and piloting an instrument to prioritize the worries of patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Patient Prefer Adherence 2018;12:647-55. [PMID: 29731612 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S151752] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
40 Seo J, Smith BD, Estey E, Voyard E, O' Donoghue B, Bridges JFP. Developing an instrument to assess patient preferences for benefits and risks of treating acute myeloid leukemia to promote patient-focused drug development. Curr Med Res Opin 2018;34:2031-9. [PMID: 29565196 DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2018.1456414] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 12] [Article Influence: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
41 Wittenberg E. Instrument Development in Choice Experiments. Commentary on: "Applying a Framework for Instrument Development of a Choice Experiment to Measure Treatment Preferences in Type 2 Diabetes". Patient 2016;9:379-81. [PMID: 27406173 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-016-0186-8] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
42 Howell M, Wong G, Rose J, Tong A, Craig JC, Howard K. Patient Preferences for Outcomes After Kidney Transplantation: A Best-Worst Scaling Survey. Transplantation 2017;101:2765-73. [DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000001793] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
43 Janssen EM, Marshall DA, Hauber AB, Bridges JFP. Improving the quality of discrete-choice experiments in health: how can we assess validity and reliability? Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 2017;17:531-42. [DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2017.1389648] [Cited by in Crossref: 44] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 38] [Article Influence: 8.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
44 Beusterien K, Chan E, Such P, de Jong Laird A, Heres S, Amos K, Loze J, Nylander A, Robinson P, Bridges JFP. Development of a stated-preference instrument to prioritize treatment goals in recent onset schizophrenia. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2017;33:2129-36. [DOI: 10.1080/03007995.2017.1384717] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
45 Janssen EM, Longo DR, Bardsley JK, Bridges JF. Education and patient preferences for treating type 2 diabetes: a stratified discrete-choice experiment. Patient Prefer Adherence 2017;11:1729-36. [PMID: 29070940 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S139471] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
46 Brown L, Lee TH, De Allegri M, Rao K, Bridges JF. Applying stated-preference methods to improve health systems in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2017;17:441-58. [PMID: 28875767 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2017.1375854] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
47 Janssen EM, Hauber AB, Bridges JFP. Conducting a Discrete-Choice Experiment Study Following Recommendations for Good Research Practices: An Application for Eliciting Patient Preferences for Diabetes Treatments. Value Health 2018;21:59-68. [PMID: 29304942 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.07.001] [Cited by in Crossref: 29] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 24] [Article Influence: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
48 Ikenwilo D, Heidenreich S, Ryan M, Mankowski C, Nazir J, Watson V. The Best of Both Worlds: An Example Mixed Methods Approach to Understand Men’s Preferences for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms. Patient 2018;11:55-67. [DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0263-7] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
49 Busch RS, Kane MP. Combination SGLT2 inhibitor and GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy: a complementary approach to the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Postgrad Med 2017;129:686-97. [PMID: 28657399 DOI: 10.1080/00325481.2017.1342509] [Cited by in Crossref: 26] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 22] [Article Influence: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
50 Janssen EM, Bridges JFP. Art and Science of Instrument Development for Stated-Preference Methods. Patient 2017;10:377-9. [DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0261-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]