Advanced search
Publication Cover
Patient Preference and Adherence Volume 14, 2020 - Issue
Submit an article Journal homepage
125
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Preferences for Outcomes Among Adults with Type 1 Diabetes and Caregivers of Children with Type 1 Diabetes

Marjana Marinac1 JDRF, Washington, DC, USAView further author information
,
Jessie Sutphin2 RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USAView further author information
,
Campbell Hutton1 JDRF, Washington, DC, USAView further author information
,
Kathleen Klein2 RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USAView further author information
,
Sean Sullivan3 The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, New York, NY10169, USAView further author information
&
Carol Mansfield2 RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USACorrespondence[email protected]
ORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3144-8938View further author information
ORCID Icon
Pages 1719-1731 | Published online: 28 Sep 2020

References

  • Agiostratidou G, Anhalt H, Ball D, et al. Standardizing clinically meaningful outcome measures beyond HbA1c for type 1 diabetes: a consensus report of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Association of Diabetes Educators, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, JDRF International, The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust, the Pediatric Endocrine Society, and the T1D Exchange. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(12):1622–1630.
  • Bode BW, Schwartz S, Stubbs HA, Block JE. Glycemic characteristics in continuously monitored patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: normative values. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:2361–2366. doi:10.2337/diacare.28.10.2361
  • Foster NC, Beck RW, Miller KM, et al. State of type 1 diabetes management and outcomes from the T1D Exchange in 2016-2018. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(2):66–72. doi:10.1089/dia.2018.0384
  • Brod M, Wolden M, Christensen T, Bushnell DM. A nine-country study of the burden of non-severe nocturnal hypoglycaemic events on diabetes management and daily function. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013;15(6):546–557. doi:10.1111/dom.12070
  • Liu J, Wang R, Ganz ML, Paprocki Y, Schneider D, Weatherall J. The burden of severe hypoglycemia in type 1 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2018;34(1):171–177. doi:10.1080/03007995.2017.1391079
  • Morales J, Schneider D. Hypoglycemia. Am J Med. 2014;127(10 Suppl):S17–S24. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.07.004
  • International Hypoglycaemia Study Group. Glucose concentrations of less than 3.0 mmol/L (54 mg/dL) should be reported in clinical trials: a joint position statement of the american diabetes association and the european association for the study of diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(1):155–157. doi:10.2337/dc16-2215
  • Maahs DM, Buckingham BA, Castle JR, et al. Outcome measures for artificial pancreas clinical trials: a consensus report. Diabetes Care. 2016;39(7):1175–1179. doi:10.2337/dc15-2716
  • Beyond A1C Writing Group. Need for regulatory change to incorporate beyond A1C glycemic metrics. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(6):e92–e94. doi:10.2337/dci18-0010
  • 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.
  • Chrzan K, Orme B An overview and comparison of design strategies for choice-based conjoint analysis. Technical paper series. Sawtooth Software Inc; 2000.
  • Kuhfeld W. Marketing Research Methods in SAS: Experimental Design, Choice, Conjoint, and Graphical Techniques. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc.; 2010.
  • Kuhfeld W Efficient experimental designs using computerized searches. Sawtooth Software Conference Proceedings. 1997; 71–86.
  • Kuhfeld W, Tobias F, Garratt M. Efficient experimental design with marketing research applications. J Mark Res. 1994;31:545–557. doi:10.1177/002224379403100408
  • Sawtooth Software, Inc. CBC User Manual. Sequim: Sawtooth Software; 1999.
  • Hauber AB, González JM, Groothuis-Oudshoorn C, et al. Statistical methods for the analysis of discrete choice experiments: a report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Good Research Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2016;19(4):300–315. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.004
  • Train K. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. 2nd ed. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 2009.
  • Train K, Sonnier G. Mixed logit with bounded distributions of correlated partworths. In: Scarpa R, Alberini A, editors. Application of Simulation Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics. Dordrecht: Springer Publisher; 2005:117–134.
  • Runge AS, Kennedy L, Brown AS, et al. Does time-in-range matter? Perspectives from people with diabetes on the success of current therapies and the drivers of improved outcomes. Clin Diabetes. 2018;36:112–119. doi:10.2337/cd17-0094
  • Uzoigwe C, Hamersky CM, Arbit DI, Weng W, Radin MS. Assessing prevalence of hypoglycemia in a medical transcription database. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2020;13:2209–2216. doi:10.2147/DMSO.S235298
  • Ratzki-Leewing A, Harris SB, Mequanint S, et al. Real-world crude incidence of hypoglycemia in adults with diabetes: results of the InHypo-DM Study, Canada. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2018;6(1):e000503. doi:10.1136/bmjdrc-2017-000503
  • 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;33:119–129. doi:10.1016/j.reseneeco.2010.01.006
  • 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. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.005

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.