Exploring perceptions of using preference elicitation methods to inform clinical trial design in rheumatology: A qualitative study and OMERACT collaboration

Megan Thomas, Deborah A. Marshall, Adalberto Loyola Sanchez, Susan J. Bartlett, Annelies Boonen, Liana Fraenkel, Laurie Proulx, Marieke Voshaar, Nick Bansback, Rachelle Buchbinder, Francis Guillemin, Mickaël Hiligsmann, Dawn P. Richards, Pamela Richards, Beverley Shea, Peter Tugwell, Marie Falahee, Glen S. Hazlewood*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

18 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Clinical trial design requires value judgements and understanding patient preferences may help inform these judgements, for example when prioritizing treatment candidates, designing complex interventions, selecting appropriate outcomes, determining clinically important thresholds, or weighting composite outcomes. Preference elicitation methods are quantitative approaches that can estimate patients' preferences to quantify the absolute or relative importance of outcomes or other attributes relevant to the decision context. We aimed to explore stakeholder perceptions of using preference elicitation methods to inform judgements when designing clinical trials in rheumatology.

Methods: We conducted 1-on-1 semi-structured interviews with patients with rheumatic diseases and rheumatology clinicians/researchers, recruited using purposive and snowball sampling. Participants were provided pre-interview materials, including a video and a document, to introduce the topic of preference elicitation methods and case examples of potential applications to clinical trials. Interviews were conducted via Zoom and were audio-recorded and transcribed. We used thematic analysis to analyze our data.

Results: We interviewed 17 patients and 9 clinicians/researchers, until data and inductive thematic saturation were achieved within each group. Themes were grouped into overall perceptions, barriers, and facilitators. Patients and clinicians/researchers generally agreed that preference elicitation studies can improve clinical trial design, but that many considerations are required around preference heterogeneity and feasibility. A key barrier identified was the additional resources and expertise required to measure and incorporate preferences effectively in trial design. Key facilitators included developing guidance on how to use preference elicitation to inform trial design, as well as the role of external decision-makers in developing such guidance, and the need to leverage the movement towards patient engagement in research to encourage including patient preferences when designing trials.

Conclusion: Our findings allowed us to consider the potential applications of patient preferences in trial design according to stakeholders within rheumatology who are involved in the trial process. Future research should be conducted to develop comprehensive guidance on how to meaningfully include patient preferences when designing clinical trials in rheumatology. Doing so may have important downstream effects for shared decision-making, especially given the chronic nature of rheumatic diseases.

Original languageEnglish
Article number152112
JournalSeminars in arthritis and rheumatism
Volume58
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2023
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Clinical trials
  • OMERACT
  • Patient preferences
  • Preference elicitation methods
  • Rheumatology
  • Trade-offs

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Exploring perceptions of using preference elicitation methods to inform clinical trial design in rheumatology: A qualitative study and OMERACT collaboration'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this