Skip to main content
Journal cover image

What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability.

Journal articles  - Journal Article, Review
Marsh, K; Sepulveda, JMG; Berlin, C; Levitan, B; Boeri, M; Groothuis-Oudshoorn, CGM; Crossnohere, NL; Jimenez-Moreno, C; Liden, B; Stoeckert, I ...
Published in: Patient
March 2025

Using patient preference information (PPI) to incorporate patient voices into the drug development lifecycle can help align therapies with the needs and values of patients. However, several barriers have limited the use of PPI, including a lack of clarity on its use by decision-makers, a need for greater decision-maker trust in PPI, and a lack of time, budgets, and access to specialist expertise. The value proposition for PPI could be enhanced by making it FAIR: Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. To support the development of a research agenda to deliver FAIR PPI, we reviewed related endeavors in the development of repositories of existing studies, disease models, benefit transfer, and common data standards. We concluded that developing FAIR PPI would require advances in the science of PPI, including the establishment of a consortium, mirroring the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) or Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OPOM), to develop PPI data standards, and research into the sources of variation in patient preferences. This will require the science of PPI to graduate from being a body of empirical observations to developing theories that explain variations in patient preferences, simultaneously driving both efficiency in the generation of PPI and trust in PPI.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Patient

DOI

EISSN

1178-1661

Publication Date

March 2025

Volume

18

Issue

2

Start / End Page

101 / 108

Location

New Zealand

Related Subject Headings

  • Patient Preference
  • Humans
  • Health Information Interoperability
  • 42 Health sciences
  • 32 Biomedical and clinical sciences
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Marsh, K., Sepulveda, J. M. G., Berlin, C., Levitan, B., Boeri, M., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, C. G. M., … Hauber, B. (2025). What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability. Patient, 18(2), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-025-00727-9
Marsh, Kevin, Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda, Conny Berlin, Bennett Levitan, Marco Boeri, Catharina G. M. Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Norah L. Crossnohere, et al. “What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability.Patient 18, no. 2 (March 2025): 101–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-025-00727-9.
Marsh K, Sepulveda JMG, Berlin C, Levitan B, Boeri M, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, et al. What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability. Patient. 2025 Mar;18(2):101–8.
Marsh, Kevin, et al. “What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability.Patient, vol. 18, no. 2, Mar. 2025, pp. 101–08. Pubmed, doi:10.1007/s40271-025-00727-9.
Marsh K, Sepulveda JMG, Berlin C, Levitan B, Boeri M, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CGM, Crossnohere NL, Jimenez-Moreno C, Liden B, Stoeckert I, Veldwijk J, Watt S, Hauber B. What Next for the Science of Patient Preference? Interoperability, Standardization, and Transferability. Patient. 2025 Mar;18(2):101–108.
Journal cover image

Published In

Patient

DOI

EISSN

1178-1661

Publication Date

March 2025

Volume

18

Issue

2

Start / End Page

101 / 108

Location

New Zealand

Related Subject Headings

  • Patient Preference
  • Humans
  • Health Information Interoperability
  • 42 Health sciences
  • 32 Biomedical and clinical sciences