2021
Assessing Patient Preferences for Treatment Options for Pediatric Sickle Cell Disease: A Critical Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies
Katoch D, Krishnamurti L. Assessing Patient Preferences for Treatment Options for Pediatric Sickle Cell Disease: A Critical Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies. Patient Preference And Adherence 2021, 15: 2221-2229. PMID: 34629865, PMCID: PMC8493010, DOI: 10.2147/ppa.s264918.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchSickle cell diseasePatient preferencesTreatment preferencesCell diseasePediatric sickle cell diseaseHematopoietic cell transplantPatients' treatment preferencesBurden of careQuality of lifeQualitative studyStandard gamble studyCurative intentRed blood cellsSupportive careSubstantial morbidityCell transplantImpaired qualityTreatment optionsIntravascular hemolysisPatient utilitiesPremature mortalityCaregiver perspectivesTreatment alternativesBlood cellsUtility studies
2011
Measuring Pain Impact Versus Pain Severity Using a Numeric Rating Scale
Fraenkel L, Falzer P, Fried T, Kohler M, Peters E, Kerns R, Leventhal H. Measuring Pain Impact Versus Pain Severity Using a Numeric Rating Scale. Journal Of General Internal Medicine 2011, 27: 555-560. PMID: 22081365, PMCID: PMC3326111, DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1926-z.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsNumeric rating scaleImpact of painPain impactPatient preferencesPain intensity numeric rating scaleRating ScalePatients' treatment preferencesResultsTwo hundred fortyMore effective treatmentsHigh-risk treatmentValuable screening instrumentPain severityCurrent medicationsMusculoskeletal painNRS scoresClinical outcomesIllness perceptionsPhysical functionTreatment preferencesHundred fortyEffective treatmentPainClinical practiceAppropriate managementScreening instrument
2007
The Association between Treatment Preferences and Trajectories of Care at the End-of-Life
Cosgriff JA, Pisani M, Bradley EH, O’Leary J, Fried TR. The Association between Treatment Preferences and Trajectories of Care at the End-of-Life. Journal Of General Internal Medicine 2007, 22: 1566-1571. PMID: 17874168, PMCID: PMC2219807, DOI: 10.1007/s11606-007-0362-6.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsTreatment preferencesLife careIntensive treatmentAcute processAggressive careSymptomatic reliefTrajectories of endUnwanted aggressive careRelief of symptomsPatients' treatment preferencesDirection of patientsTrajectory of careHigh-quality endAdvanced diseaseSymptom controlConclusionsThe associationAssociations of preferenceIntensive interventionCarePatientsLife prolongationTreatmentPerson's ageReliefAssociation
2006
Patient treatment preferences for osteoporosis
Fraenkel L, Gulanski B, Wittink D. Patient treatment preferences for osteoporosis. Arthritis & Rheumatism 2006, 55: 729-735. PMID: 17013870, PMCID: PMC1626097, DOI: 10.1002/art.22229.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAdministration, OralAgedAged, 80 and overBone Density Conservation AgentsCross-Sectional StudiesDiphosphonatesDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleFractures, BoneHealth Care SurveysHumansInfusions, IntravenousInjections, SubcutaneousMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosisParathyroid HormonePatient CompliancePatient SatisfactionRecombinant ProteinsRisk AssessmentSurveys and QuestionnairesConceptsPreferred treatment optionRoute of administrationPatient's preferred treatment optionRecombinant human parathyroid hormoneOsteoporosis treatment optionsTreatment optionsAnnual infusionPatient preferencesTreatment preferencesIntravenous bisphosphonatesTreatment choiceRisk of vertebralTreatment-naive participantsPatients' treatment preferencesLong-term adherenceIndividual patient preferencesHuman parathyroid hormoneOral bisphosphonatesOsteoporosis medicationsWeekly bisphosphonatesWeekly pillConjoint analysis questionnaireOral medicationsHip fractureFuture fractures
This site is protected by hCaptcha and its Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply