↓ Skip to main content

Mental health pharmacists views on shared decision-making for antipsychotics in serious mental illness

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
Title
Mental health pharmacists views on shared decision-making for antipsychotics in serious mental illness
Published in
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11096-016-0352-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mediha Younas, Eleanor Bradley, Nikki Holmes, Dolly Sud, Ian D. Maidment

Abstract

Background People diagnosed with serious mental illnesses (SMIs) such as schizophrenia and bipolar affective disorder are frequently treated with antipsychotics. National guidance advises the use of shared decision-making (SDM) in antipsychotic prescribing. There is currently little data on the opinions of health professionals on the role of SDM. Objective To explore the views and experiences of UK mental health pharmacists regarding the use of SDM in antipsychotic prescribing in people diagnosed with SMI. Setting The study was conducted by interviewing secondary care mental health pharmacists in the UK to obtain qualitative data. Methods Semi-structured interviews were recorded. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted using the method of constant comparison. Main outcome measure Themes evolving from mental health pharmacists on SDM in relation to antipsychotic prescribing in people with SMI. Results Thirteen mental health pharmacists were interviewed. SDM was perceived to be linked to positive clinical outcomes including adherence, service user satisfaction and improved therapeutic relations. Despite more prescribers and service users supporting SDM, it was not seen as being practised as widely as it could be; this was attributed to a number of barriers, most predominantly issues surrounding service user's lacking capacity to engage in SDM and time pressures on clinical staff. The need for greater effort to work around the issues, engage service users and adopt a more inter-professional approach was conveyed. Conclusion The mental health pharmacists support SDM for antipsychotic prescribing, believing that it improves outcomes. However, barriers are seen to limit implementation. More research is needed into overcoming the barriers and measuring the benefits of SDM, along with exploring a more inter-professional approach to SDM.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 144 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 22%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Other 10 7%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 43 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 19 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 12%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 44 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 May 2017.
All research outputs
#13,783,916
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#668
of 1,092 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#204,105
of 364,033 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#16
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,092 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,033 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.