Treatment Preferences for Cardiac Procedures of Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease in Acute Coronary Syndrome: Design and Pilot Testing of a Discrete Choice Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease is associated with a high incidence of acute coronary syndrome and related morbidity and mortality. Treatment choices for patients with chronic kidney disease involve trade-offs in the potential benefits and harms of invasive management options. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to quantify preferences of patients with chronic kidney disease toward invasive heart procedures. DESIGN: Design and pilot a discrete choice experiment. SETTING: We piloted the discrete choice experiment in 2 multidisciplinary chronic kidney disease clinics in Calgary, Alberta, using an 8-question survey. PATIENTS: , not currently receiving dialysis, and able to communicate in English. MEASUREMENTS: Quantification of the average importances of key attributes of invasive heart procedures. METHODS: We identified attributes most important to patients and physicians concerning invasive versus conservative management for acute coronary syndrome, using semi-structured qualitative interviews. Levels for each attribute were derived from analysis of early invasive versus conservative acute coronary syndrome management clinical trials and cohort studies, where subgroups of patients with chronic kidney disease were reported. We designed the pilot study with patient partners with relevant lived experience and considered statistical efficiency to estimate main effects and interactions, as well as response efficiency. Hierarchical Bayesian estimation was used to quantify average importances of attributes. RESULTS: We recruited 43 patients with chronic kidney disease, mean (SD) age 67 (14) years, 67% male, and 35% with a history of cardiovascular disease, of whom 39 completed the survey within 2 weeks of enrollment. The results of the pilot revealed acute kidney injury requiring dialysis and permanent kidney replacement therapy, as well as death within 1 year were the most important attributes. Measures of internal validity for the pilot discrete choice experiment were comparable to those for other published discrete choice experiments. LIMITATIONS: Discrete choice experiments are complex instruments and often cognitively demanding for patients. This survey included multiple risk attributes which may have been challenging for some patients to understand. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of a discrete choice experiment to quantify preferences of patients with chronic kidney disease toward the benefits and trade-offs related to invasive versus conservative management for acute coronary syndrome. These preliminary findings suggest that patients with chronic kidney disease may be on average similarly risk averse toward kidney replacement therapy and death. This pilot information will be used to inform a larger discrete choice experiment that will refine these estimates of patient preferences and characterize subgroups with distinct treatment preferences, which should provide new knowledge that can facilitate shared decision-making between patients with chronic kidney disease and their care providers in the setting of acute coronary syndrome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.028 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".