Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Quality of Life Research 9/2019

Open Access 01-09-2019 | Migraine

Health state utilities associated with attributes of migraine preventive treatments based on patient and general population preferences

Authors: Louis S. Matza, Kristen A. Deger, Pamela Vo, Farooq Maniyar, Peter J. Goadsby

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 9/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

While previous studies have estimated health state utilities associated with migraine severity and frequency, migraine treatments vary in other ways that may have an impact on patients’ quality of life, preference, and utility. The purpose of this study was to estimate utilities associated with migraine treatment attributes including route of administration and treatment-related adverse events (AEs).

Methods

In time trade-off interviews, migraine patients and general population participants in the UK valued health state vignettes drafted based on literature, medication labels, and clinician interviews. All respondents valued migraine health states varying in route of administration. Each participant also valued eight health states (randomly selected from a total of 15) that added the description of an AE to a migraine health state.

Results

A total of 400 participants completed interviews (200 general population [49.0% female; mean age = 43.6 years]; 200 migraine patients [74.5% female; mean age = 45.8 years]). In the general population sample, mean utilities of health states without aura were 0.79 with daily oral medication, 0.78 with one injection per month, and 0.72 with 31–39 injections once every 3 months. The greatest disutilities (i.e., decreases in utility) were for AEs associated with oral medications (e.g., − 0.060 [fatigue] and − 0.098 [brain fog]). Differences among health states followed the same pattern in the patient sample as in the general population sample.

Conclusions

Utilities estimated from the general population sample may be used to represent route of administration and AEs in cost-utility models. Results from the patient sample indicate that these treatment characteristics have an impact on patient preference.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Batty, A. J., et al. (2013). The cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for the prophylaxis of headache in adults with chronic migraine in the UK. Journal of Medical Economics, 16(7), 877–887.CrossRefPubMed Batty, A. J., et al. (2013). The cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA for the prophylaxis of headache in adults with chronic migraine in the UK. Journal of Medical Economics, 16(7), 877–887.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Bloudek, L. M., et al. (2013). Abstract PND27: Cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxina for prophylaxis of headaches in adults with chronic migraine in canada. Value in Health, 16(A1–A298), A105.CrossRef Bloudek, L. M., et al. (2013). Abstract PND27: Cost-effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxina for prophylaxis of headaches in adults with chronic migraine in canada. Value in Health, 16(A1–A298), A105.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Brown, J. S., et al. (2006). Cost-effectiveness of migraine prevention: The case of topiramate in the UK. Cephalalgia, 26(12), 1473–1482.CrossRefPubMed Brown, J. S., et al. (2006). Cost-effectiveness of migraine prevention: The case of topiramate in the UK. Cephalalgia, 26(12), 1473–1482.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Lipton, R. B., et al. (2018). Estimating the clinical effectiveness and value-based price range of erenumab for the prevention of migraine in patients with prior treatment failures: A US societal perspective. Journal of Medical Economics, 21, 666–675.CrossRefPubMed Lipton, R. B., et al. (2018). Estimating the clinical effectiveness and value-based price range of erenumab for the prevention of migraine in patients with prior treatment failures: A US societal perspective. Journal of Medical Economics, 21, 666–675.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Ruggeri, M. (2014). The cost effectiveness of Botox in Italian patients with chronic migraine. Neurological Sciences, 35(Suppl 1), 45–47.CrossRefPubMed Ruggeri, M. (2014). The cost effectiveness of Botox in Italian patients with chronic migraine. Neurological Sciences, 35(Suppl 1), 45–47.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Yu, J., Smith, K. J., & Brixner, D. I. (2010). Cost effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for the prevention of migraine: A Markov model application. CNS Drugs, 24(8), 695–712.CrossRefPubMed Yu, J., Smith, K. J., & Brixner, D. I. (2010). Cost effectiveness of pharmacotherapy for the prevention of migraine: A Markov model application. CNS Drugs, 24(8), 695–712.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Brazier, J. R., et al. (2017). Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. New York: Oxford University Press. Brazier, J. R., et al. (2017). Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
go back to reference Brown, J. S., et al. (2008). Migraine frequency and health utilities: Findings from a multisite survey. Value Health, 11(2), 315–321.CrossRefPubMed Brown, J. S., et al. (2008). Migraine frequency and health utilities: Findings from a multisite survey. Value Health, 11(2), 315–321.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Brown, J. S., et al. (2005). Cost-effectiveness of topiramate in migraine prevention: Results from a pharmacoeconomic model of topiramate treatment. Headache, 45(8), 1012–1022.CrossRefPubMed Brown, J. S., et al. (2005). Cost-effectiveness of topiramate in migraine prevention: Results from a pharmacoeconomic model of topiramate treatment. Headache, 45(8), 1012–1022.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Desai, P. R., et al. (2015). Abstract PND68: Systematic literature review of health state utility values in patients with Migraine. Value in Health, 18(A), A760.CrossRef Desai, P. R., et al. (2015). Abstract PND68: Systematic literature review of health state utility values in patients with Migraine. Value in Health, 18(A), A760.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Gillard, P. J., et al. (2012). Mapping from disease-specific measures to health-state utility values in individuals with migraine. Value in Health, 15(3), 485–494.CrossRefPubMed Gillard, P. J., et al. (2012). Mapping from disease-specific measures to health-state utility values in individuals with migraine. Value in Health, 15(3), 485–494.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Oliver, A., & Wolff, J. (2014). Are people consistent when trading time for health? Economics and Human Biology, 15, 41–46.CrossRefPubMed Oliver, A., & Wolff, J. (2014). Are people consistent when trading time for health? Economics and Human Biology, 15, 41–46.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Stafford, M. R., et al. (2012). EQ-5D-derived utility values for different levels of migraine severity from a UK sample of migraineurs. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 10, 65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Stafford, M. R., et al. (2012). EQ-5D-derived utility values for different levels of migraine severity from a UK sample of migraineurs. Health Qual Life Outcomes, 10, 65.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Edvinsson, L. (2018). The CGRP Pathway in Migraine as a viable target for therapies. Headache, 58(Suppl 1), 33–47.CrossRefPubMed Edvinsson, L. (2018). The CGRP Pathway in Migraine as a viable target for therapies. Headache, 58(Suppl 1), 33–47.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Khan, S., Olesen, A., & Ashina, M. (2019). CGRP, a target for preventive therapy in migraine and cluster headache: Systematic review of clinical data. Cephalalgia, 39(3):374–389.CrossRefPubMed Khan, S., Olesen, A., & Ashina, M. (2019). CGRP, a target for preventive therapy in migraine and cluster headache: Systematic review of clinical data. Cephalalgia, 39(3):374–389.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Mitsikostas, D. D., & Reuter, U. (2017). Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention: Comparisons across randomized controlled studies. Current Opinion in Neurology, 30(3), 272–280.CrossRefPubMed Mitsikostas, D. D., & Reuter, U. (2017). Calcitonin gene-related peptide monoclonal antibodies for migraine prevention: Comparisons across randomized controlled studies. Current Opinion in Neurology, 30(3), 272–280.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Tso, A. R., & Goadsby, P. J. (2017). Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: The next era of migraine prevention? Current Treatment Options in Neurology, 19(8), 27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Tso, A. R., & Goadsby, P. J. (2017). Anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies: The next era of migraine prevention? Current Treatment Options in Neurology, 19(8), 27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Dodick, D. W., et al. (2018). ARISE: A Phase 3 randomized trial of erenumab for episodic migraine. Cephalalgia, 38(6), 1026–1037.CrossRefPubMed Dodick, D. W., et al. (2018). ARISE: A Phase 3 randomized trial of erenumab for episodic migraine. Cephalalgia, 38(6), 1026–1037.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Goadsby, P. J., et al. (2017). A controlled trial of erenumab for episodic migraine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 377(22), 2123–2132.CrossRefPubMed Goadsby, P. J., et al. (2017). A controlled trial of erenumab for episodic migraine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 377(22), 2123–2132.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Tepper, S., et al. (2017). Safety and efficacy of erenumab for preventive treatment of chronic migraine: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial. The Lancet Neurology, 16(6), 425–434.CrossRefPubMed Tepper, S., et al. (2017). Safety and efficacy of erenumab for preventive treatment of chronic migraine: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial. The Lancet Neurology, 16(6), 425–434.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Dodick, D. W., et al. (2018). Effect of fremanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic migraine: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 319(19), 1999–2008.CrossRefPubMed Dodick, D. W., et al. (2018). Effect of fremanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic migraine: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 319(19), 1999–2008.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Silberstein, S. D., et al. (2017). Fremanezumab for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 377(22), 2113–2122.CrossRefPubMed Silberstein, S. D., et al. (2017). Fremanezumab for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 377(22), 2113–2122.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Skljarevski, V., et al. (2018). Efficacy and safety of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: Results of the EVOLVE-2 Phase 3 randomized controlled clinical trial. Cephalalgia, 38:1442–1454.CrossRefPubMed Skljarevski, V., et al. (2018). Efficacy and safety of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: Results of the EVOLVE-2 Phase 3 randomized controlled clinical trial. Cephalalgia, 38:1442–1454.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Stauffer, V. L., et al. (2018) Evaluation of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: The EVOLVE-1 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurology 75:1080–1088CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Stauffer, V. L., et al. (2018) Evaluation of galcanezumab for the prevention of episodic migraine: The EVOLVE-1 randomized clinical trial. JAMA Neurology 75:1080–1088CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Goadsby, P. J., & Sprenger, T. (2010). Current practice and future directions in the prevention and acute management of migraine. The Lancet Neurology, 9(3), 285–298.CrossRefPubMed Goadsby, P. J., & Sprenger, T. (2010). Current practice and future directions in the prevention and acute management of migraine. The Lancet Neurology, 9(3), 285–298.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Aurora, S. K., et al. (2010). OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: Results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase of the PREEMPT 1 trial. Cephalalgia, 30(7), 793–803.CrossRefPubMed Aurora, S. K., et al. (2010). OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: Results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase of the PREEMPT 1 trial. Cephalalgia, 30(7), 793–803.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Diener, H. C., et al. (2010). OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: Results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase of the PREEMPT 2 trial. Cephalalgia, 30(7), 804–814.CrossRefPubMed Diener, H. C., et al. (2010). OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: Results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase of the PREEMPT 2 trial. Cephalalgia, 30(7), 804–814.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). (2013). Process and methods guides: Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). (2013). Process and methods guides: Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE.
29.
go back to reference Brennan, V. K., & Dixon, S. (2013). Incorporating process utility into quality adjusted life years: A systematic review of empirical studies. Pharmacoeconomics, 31(8), 677–691.CrossRefPubMed Brennan, V. K., & Dixon, S. (2013). Incorporating process utility into quality adjusted life years: A systematic review of empirical studies. Pharmacoeconomics, 31(8), 677–691.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Diener, H. C., et al. (2004). Topiramate in migraine prophylaxis–results from a placebo-controlled trial with propranolol as an active control. Journal of Neurology, 251(8), 943–950.CrossRefPubMed Diener, H. C., et al. (2004). Topiramate in migraine prophylaxis–results from a placebo-controlled trial with propranolol as an active control. Journal of Neurology, 251(8), 943–950.CrossRefPubMed
31.
go back to reference Dodick, D. W., et al. (2009). Topiramate versus amitriptyline in migraine prevention: A 26-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group noninferiority trial in adult migraineurs. Clinical Therapeutics, 31(3), 542–559.CrossRefPubMed Dodick, D. W., et al. (2009). Topiramate versus amitriptyline in migraine prevention: A 26-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group noninferiority trial in adult migraineurs. Clinical Therapeutics, 31(3), 542–559.CrossRefPubMed
32.
go back to reference Dodick, D. W., et al. (2010). OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: Pooled results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phases of the PREEMPT clinical program. Headache, 50(6), 921–936.CrossRefPubMed Dodick, D. W., et al. (2010). OnabotulinumtoxinA for treatment of chronic migraine: Pooled results from the double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phases of the PREEMPT clinical program. Headache, 50(6), 921–936.CrossRefPubMed
33.
34.
go back to reference Gerard, K., Dobson, M., & Hall, J. (1993). Framing and labelling effects in health descriptions: Quality adjusted life years for treatment of breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(1), 77–84.CrossRefPubMed Gerard, K., Dobson, M., & Hall, J. (1993). Framing and labelling effects in health descriptions: Quality adjusted life years for treatment of breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46(1), 77–84.CrossRefPubMed
35.
go back to reference Matza, L. S., et al. (2017). Health state utilities associated with glucose monitoring devices. Value in Health, 20(3), 507–511.CrossRefPubMed Matza, L. S., et al. (2017). Health state utilities associated with glucose monitoring devices. Value in Health, 20(3), 507–511.CrossRefPubMed
36.
go back to reference Rowen, D., et al. (2012). It’s all in the name, or is it? The impact of labeling on health state values. Medical Decision Making, 32(1), 31–40.CrossRefPubMed Rowen, D., et al. (2012). It’s all in the name, or is it? The impact of labeling on health state values. Medical Decision Making, 32(1), 31–40.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Sackett, D. L., & Torrance, G. W. (1978). The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 31(11), 697–704.CrossRefPubMed Sackett, D. L., & Torrance, G. W. (1978). The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 31(11), 697–704.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Bussone, G., et al. (2005). Topiramate 100 mg/day in migraine prevention: A pooled analysis of double-blind randomised controlled trials. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 59(8), 961–968.CrossRefPubMed Bussone, G., et al. (2005). Topiramate 100 mg/day in migraine prevention: A pooled analysis of double-blind randomised controlled trials. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 59(8), 961–968.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Diener, H. C., et al. (2014). Pooled analysis of the safety and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of chronic migraine. European Journal of Neurology, 21(6), 851–859.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Diener, H. C., et al. (2014). Pooled analysis of the safety and tolerability of onabotulinumtoxinA in the treatment of chronic migraine. European Journal of Neurology, 21(6), 851–859.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
go back to reference Stovner, L. J., et al. (2014). A comparative study of candesartan versus propranolol for migraine prophylaxis: A randomised, triple-blind, placebo-controlled, double cross-over study. Cephalalgia, 34(7), 523–532.CrossRefPubMed Stovner, L. J., et al. (2014). A comparative study of candesartan versus propranolol for migraine prophylaxis: A randomised, triple-blind, placebo-controlled, double cross-over study. Cephalalgia, 34(7), 523–532.CrossRefPubMed
41.
go back to reference Rowen, D., Brazier, J. (2011). Health utility measurement. In Glied, S., & Smith, P., (ed.) The oxford handbook of health economics (p. 788–813). New York: Oxford University Press. Rowen, D., Brazier, J. (2011). Health utility measurement. In Glied, S., & Smith, P., (ed.) The oxford handbook of health economics (p. 788–813). New York: Oxford University Press.
42.
go back to reference British Association for the Study of Headache (BASH). Guidelines for All Healthcare Professionals in the Diagnosis and Management of Migraine: Tension-Type Headache, Cluster Headache. Medication-Overuse Headache. E.A. MacGregor, T.J. Steiner, and P.T.G. Davies, Editors. East Yorkshire: BASH. 2010; 3rd edition. British Association for the Study of Headache (BASH). Guidelines for All Healthcare Professionals in the Diagnosis and Management of Migraine: Tension-Type Headache, Cluster Headache. Medication-Overuse Headache. E.A. MacGregor, T.J. Steiner, and P.T.G. Davies, Editors. East Yorkshire: BASH. 2010; 3rd edition.
43.
go back to reference Steiner, T. J., et al. (1999). Epidemiology of migraine in England. Cephalalgia, 19(abstract), 305–306. Steiner, T. J., et al. (1999). Epidemiology of migraine in England. Cephalalgia, 19(abstract), 305–306.
46.
go back to reference World Health Organization (WHO). (2011). ATLAS—Of headache disorders and resources in the World, Lifting the Burden (p. 35). Geneva: WHO. World Health Organization (WHO). (2011). ATLAS—Of headache disorders and resources in the World, Lifting the Burden (p. 35). Geneva: WHO.
47.
go back to reference Bilir, S. P., et al. (2018). Cost-effectiveness analysis of a flash glucose monitoring system for patients with type 1 diabetes receiving intensive insulin treatment in Sweden. European Journal of Endocrinology, 14(2), 73–79.CrossRef Bilir, S. P., et al. (2018). Cost-effectiveness analysis of a flash glucose monitoring system for patients with type 1 diabetes receiving intensive insulin treatment in Sweden. European Journal of Endocrinology, 14(2), 73–79.CrossRef
48.
go back to reference Peng, S., et al. (2015). Cost-effectiveness of DTG + ABC/3TC versus EFV/TDF/FTC for first-line treatment of HIV-1 in the United States. Journal of Medical Economics, 18(10), 763–776.CrossRefPubMed Peng, S., et al. (2015). Cost-effectiveness of DTG + ABC/3TC versus EFV/TDF/FTC for first-line treatment of HIV-1 in the United States. Journal of Medical Economics, 18(10), 763–776.CrossRefPubMed
49.
go back to reference Sorensen, S. V., et al. (2016) The cost-effectiveness of Ibrutinib in treatment of relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Health Economics & Outcome Research, 2(121), 2. Sorensen, S. V., et al. (2016) The cost-effectiveness of Ibrutinib in treatment of relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Health Economics & Outcome Research, 2(121), 2.
50.
go back to reference Tosh, J. C., Longworth, L. J., & George, E. (2011). Utility values in National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) technology appraisals. Value in Health, 14(1), 102–109.CrossRefPubMed Tosh, J. C., Longworth, L. J., & George, E. (2011). Utility values in National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) technology appraisals. Value in Health, 14(1), 102–109.CrossRefPubMed
51.
go back to reference Higgins, A., et al. (2014). Does convenience matter in health care delivery? A systematic review of convenience-based aspects of process utility. Value in Health, 17(8), 877–887.CrossRefPubMed Higgins, A., et al. (2014). Does convenience matter in health care delivery? A systematic review of convenience-based aspects of process utility. Value in Health, 17(8), 877–887.CrossRefPubMed
52.
go back to reference Holko, P., Kawalec, P., & Mossakowska, M. (2018). Quality of life related to oral, subcutaneous, and intravenous biologic treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: A time trade-off study. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 30(2), 174–180.CrossRef Holko, P., Kawalec, P., & Mossakowska, M. (2018). Quality of life related to oral, subcutaneous, and intravenous biologic treatment of inflammatory bowel disease: A time trade-off study. European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 30(2), 174–180.CrossRef
53.
go back to reference Jorgensen, T. R., et al. (2016). The effect of the medicine administration route on health-related quality of life: Results from a time trade-off survey in patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia in 2 Nordic countries. BMC Psychiatry, 16, 244.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jorgensen, T. R., et al. (2016). The effect of the medicine administration route on health-related quality of life: Results from a time trade-off survey in patients with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia in 2 Nordic countries. BMC Psychiatry, 16, 244.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
54.
go back to reference Hixson-Wallace, J. A., Dotson, J. B., & Blakey, S. A. (2001). Effect of regimen complexity on patient satisfaction and compliance with warfarin therapy. Clinical and Applied Thrombosis-Hemostasis, 7(1), 33–37.CrossRefPubMed Hixson-Wallace, J. A., Dotson, J. B., & Blakey, S. A. (2001). Effect of regimen complexity on patient satisfaction and compliance with warfarin therapy. Clinical and Applied Thrombosis-Hemostasis, 7(1), 33–37.CrossRefPubMed
55.
go back to reference Morris, L. S., & Schulz, R. M. (1993). Medication compliance: The patient’s perspective. Clinical Therapeutics, 15(3), 593–606.PubMed Morris, L. S., & Schulz, R. M. (1993). Medication compliance: The patient’s perspective. Clinical Therapeutics, 15(3), 593–606.PubMed
56.
go back to reference Shikiar, R., & Rentz, A. M. (2004). Satisfaction with medication: An overview of conceptual, methodologic, and regulatory issues. Value in Health, 7(2), 204–215.CrossRefPubMed Shikiar, R., & Rentz, A. M. (2004). Satisfaction with medication: An overview of conceptual, methodologic, and regulatory issues. Value in Health, 7(2), 204–215.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Health state utilities associated with attributes of migraine preventive treatments based on patient and general population preferences
Authors
Louis S. Matza
Kristen A. Deger
Pamela Vo
Farooq Maniyar
Peter J. Goadsby
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Keywords
Migraine
Aura
Published in
Quality of Life Research / Issue 9/2019
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02163-3

Other articles of this Issue 9/2019

Quality of Life Research 9/2019 Go to the issue