Figures & data
Table 1 Attributes and levels included in the scenarios
Table 2 Patient sociodemographic and clinical variables
Table 3 Number and percentage of patients receiving treatment with BAs at the time of study inclusion, and previous treatment
Figure 1 Patients’ (A) and rheumatologists’ (B) utility values.
Abbreviation: AEs, adverse events.
![Figure 1 Patients’ (A) and rheumatologists’ (B) utility values.](/cms/asset/01d64fbd-c0b1-40d6-9ce1-c233f28cdae4/dppa_a_106311_f0001_c.jpg)
Figure 2 Relative importance values given by both patients and rheumatologists to the attributes of biological agents and for specific rheumatic conditions.
![Figure 2 Relative importance values given by both patients and rheumatologists to the attributes of biological agents and for specific rheumatic conditions.](/cms/asset/4b5b86c0-7a71-4f15-9328-8c078b0bcf42/dppa_a_106311_f0002_b.jpg)
Figure 3 Pareto diagrams representing patients’ and professionals’ utility values for subcutaneous and intravenous treatment alternatives.
Abbreviations: AEs, adverse events; BA, biological agent.
![Figure 3 Pareto diagrams representing patients’ and professionals’ utility values for subcutaneous and intravenous treatment alternatives.](/cms/asset/cc07a7de-17f0-4db9-9b72-e61c919c38f7/dppa_a_106311_f0003_b.jpg)
Table 4 Factors influencing patients’ and rheumatologists’ preferencesTable Footnotea