Case study · Recruitment & discrete-choice experiment
Recruiting patients and caregivers to weigh haemophilia prophylaxis trade-offs
MedPanel recruited adults with haemophilia and caregivers across the US and UK for a peer-reviewed discrete-choice experiment on prophylactic treatment preferences.
New non-factor prophylaxis options give people with haemophilia more choice — but also more trade-offs across administration mode, dosing frequency, efficacy, and risk. This study used a discrete-choice experiment (DCE) to quantify what patients and caregivers value most, and what they’re willing to give up to get it. Reaching enough eligible participants across two countries was the recruitment challenge MedPanel was brought in to solve.
More options, harder choices
For years, factor-replacement therapy was the standard of care for haemophilia prophylaxis — typically frequent intravenous infusions. Newer non-factor therapies introduce different administration modes, device types, dosing schedules, and risk profiles, forcing patients and caregivers to weigh benefits against burdens. Evidence on how they actually make those trade-offs was limited, especially outside the US.
Capturing those preferences required a sizable, eligible sample of adults with haemophilia and caregivers of affected children across two countries — a small, dispersed, and tightly defined population. Recruiting and screening that audience is exactly where MedPanel came in.
Which prophylaxis attributes do people with haemophilia and their caregivers value most — and what risks or reduced benefits will they accept to get them?
What the research set out to do
Quantify preferences and trade-offs across seven treatment attributes.
Quantify the relative importance of seven prophylaxis attributes — administration & device type, dosing frequency, efficacy, risks, refrigeration, and breakthrough-bleed needs.
Measure the trade-offs patients and caregivers will accept between benefits, risks, and administration mode.
Compare the preferences of adults with haemophilia and caregivers of children, across the US and UK.
Explore how treatment experience and burden relate to the choices people make.
Recruit, choose, model
A web-based discrete-choice experiment, built on a carefully recruited two-country sample.
Recruitment
MedPanel recruited adults (18+) with haemophilia and caregivers of children (8–17) with haemophilia A or B across the US and UK, using patient databases, advocacy groups, and social media, with eligibility screened by phone and online.
Choice experiment
Participants completed a web-based DCE — 10 choice tasks pairing hypothetical prophylaxis profiles defined by seven attributes — alongside background, numeracy, and treatment-burden questions.
Modelling
A mixed-logit model estimated preferences and relative attribute importance, with subgroup analyses exploring how choices varied by age, country, bleed history, and treatment experience.
Less burden, fewer bleeds
Preferences were strikingly consistent across adults and caregivers.
avoiding daily dosing was the top attribute
Dosing frequency carried the highest relative importance for both adults (~31%) and caregivers (~37%); both strongly preferred less-frequent dosing over daily administration.
subcutaneous strongly preferred
Both groups significantly preferred subcutaneous injection over intravenous infusion — and were willing to accept higher risk or reduced efficacy to make that switch.
accepted to switch to a prefilled pen
To move from IV infusion to a subcutaneous prefilled pen, adults would accept about two additional annual bleeds (caregivers ~1.5), plus small increases in risk.
reducing bleeds ranked second
Change in annual bleeds was the second most important attribute, and participants showed loss aversion — avoiding an extra bleed mattered more than an equivalent reduction.
A two-country sample, recruited to spec
A discrete-choice experiment only works with the right respondents in sufficient numbers. MedPanel recruited and screened a tightly defined haemophilia population — adults and caregivers, across the US and UK — so the study could quantify real preferences with confidence.
The resulting evidence shows what people with haemophilia and their caregivers value most, and the trade-offs they’ll accept — insight that supports shared decision-making and patient-centred drug development. It’s a clear example of how MedPanel’s recruitment reach powers rigorous, multi-country research.
Hard-to-reach sample delivered
Eligible adults and caregivers screened to tight clinical criteria.
Multi-country reach
Participants recruited across both the US and UK.
Peer-reviewed outcome
Findings published open access in a peer-reviewed journal.
Published, peer-reviewed, open access
The study MedPanel recruited for — available in full.
Peer-reviewed publication · 2026
Patient and Caregiver Preferences for Long-Term Prophylactic Treatment of Bleeds in Haemophilia: A Discrete-Choice Experiment
A discrete-choice experiment capturing how adults with haemophilia and caregivers weigh prophylaxis trade-offs across administration mode, dosing frequency, efficacy, and risk. MedPanel recruited the patient and caregiver participants for this study.
Read the full study
MedPanel provided participant recruitment for this peer-reviewed study. Figures shown are drawn from the published article.