Treatment preferences among patients with mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis

References

• Eichenfield LF, Stein Gold LF. The disease burden of atopic dermatitis. Semin Cutan Med Surg. 2017;36(4S):1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bylund S, Kobyletzki LB, Svalstedt M, et al. Prevalence and incidence of atopic dermatitis: a systematic review. Acta Derm Venereol. 2020;100(12):adv00160.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eichenfield LF, Wynnis TL, Chamlin SL, et al. Guidelines of care for the management of atopic dermatitis: section 1. Diagnosis and assessment of atopic dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014;70(2):338–351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okubo Y, Ho KA, Fifer S, et al. Patient and physician preferences for atopic dermatitis injection treatments in Japan. Patient and physician preferences for atopic dermatitis injection treatments in Japan. J Dermatolog Treat. 2020;31(8):821–830.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boeri M, Sutphin J, Hauber B, et al. Quantifying patient preferences for systemic atopic dermatitis treatments using a discrete-choice experiment. J Dermatolog Treat. 2022; 33(3):1449–1458.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bridges JFP, Hauber AB, Marshall D, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health –a checklist: a report of the ISPOR good research practices for conjoint analysis task force. Value Health. 2011;14(4):403–413.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson FR, Lancsar E, Marshall D, et al. Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR conjoint analysis discrete-choice experiment experimental design good research practices task force. Value Health. 2013;16(1):3–13.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauber AB, González JM, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, et al. Statistical methods for the analysis of discrete choice experiments: a report of the ISPOR conjoint analysis experimental design task force. Value Health. 2016;19(4):300–315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Food and Drug Administration [Internet]. Silver Spring (MD): U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration; 2016. Patient preference information – voluntary submission, review in premarket approval applications, humanitarian device exemption applications, and de novo requests, and inclusion in decision summaries and device labeling - guidance for industry, Food and Drug Administration staff, and other stakeholders; 2016 Aug 24 [cited 13 Mar 2023]. Available from: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Medical‌Devices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/UCM446680.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Silverberg JI, Simpson EL, Thyssen JP, et al. Efficacy and safety of abrocitinib in patients with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2020; 156(8):863–873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paller AS, Wynnis LT, Lebwohl MG, et al. Efficacy and safety of crisaborole ointment, a novel, nonsteroidal phosphodiesterase 4 (PDE4) inhibitor for the topical treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD) in children and adults. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75(3):494–503.e6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson EL, Bieber T, Guttman-Yassky LA, et al. Two phase 3 trials of dupilumab versus placebo in atopic dermatitis. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(24):2335–2348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfizer. 2016. Highlights of prescribing information: Crisaborole. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2020/207695s007s009s010lbl.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Regeneron/Sanofi. 2017. Highlights of prescribing information: dupilumab. Available from: https://www.regeneron.com/downloads/dupixent_fpi.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhfeld W, Tobias F, Garratt M. Efficient experimental design with marketing research applications. J Mark Res. 1994;31(4):545–557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhfeld W. Marketing research methods in SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• McFadden D, Train K. Mixed MNL models for discrete response. J Appl Econ. 2000;15(5):447–470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Train K. Discrete choice methods with simulation. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: cambridge University Press; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Train K, Sonnier G. Mixed logit with bounded distributions of correlated partworths. In: Scarpa R, Alberini A, editors. Applications of simulation methods in environmental and resource economics. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen JS. Use of the internet for willingness-to-pay survey: a comparison of face‑to‑face. And Web-Based Interviews. Res Energy Econ. 2011;33(1):119–129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marta-Pedroso C, Freitas H, Domingos T. Testing for the survey mode effect on contingent valuation data quality: a case study of web based versus in-person interviews. Ecol Econ. 2007;62(3-4):388–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar