In:
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 20, No. 1 ( 2020-12)
Abstract:
The use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases is associated with different benefit and harm outcomes. The aime of this study is how important these outcomes are for people and what people's preferences are. Methods We conducted a preference-eliciting survey incorporating a best–worst scaling (BWS) instrument in Iran from June to November 2019. The relative importance of 13 statins-related outcomes was assessed on a sample of 1085 participants, including 913 general population (486 women) and 172 healthcare providers from the population covered by urban and rural primary health care centers. The participants made trade-off decisions and selected the most and least worrisome outcomes concurrently from 13 choice sets; each contains four outcomes generated using the balanced incomplete block design. Results According to the mean (SD) BWS scores, which can be (+ 4) in maximum and (− 4) in minimum, in the general population, the most worrisome outcomes were severe stroke (3.37 (0.8)), severe myocardial infarction (2.71(0.7)), and cancer (2.69 (1.33)). While myopathy (− 3. 03 (1.03)), nausea/headache (− 2.69 (0.94)), and treatment discontinuation due to side effects (− 2.24 (1.14)) were the least worrisome outcomes. Preferences were similar between rural and urban areas and among health care providers and the general population with overlapping uncertainty intervals. Conclusion The rank of health outcomes may be similar in various socio-cultural contexts. The preferences for benefits and harms of statin therapy are essential to assess benefit-harm balance when recommending statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1472-6947
DOI:
10.1186/s12911-020-01304-w
Language:
English
Publisher:
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Publication Date:
2020
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2046490-3
