↓ Skip to main content

Provider–Patient Communication About Adherence to Anti-retroviral Regimens Differs by Patient Race and Ethnicity

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#41 of 3,566)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Provider–Patient Communication About Adherence to Anti-retroviral Regimens Differs by Patient Race and Ethnicity
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10461-014-0697-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Barton Laws, Yoojin Lee, William H. Rogers, Mary Catherine Beach, Somnath Saha, P. Todd Korthuis, Victoria Sharp, Jonathan Cohn, Richard Moore, Ira B. Wilson

Abstract

Disparities in HIV care and outcomes negatively affect Black and Hispanic patients. Features of clinical communication may be a factor. This study is based on coding transcripts of 404 routine outpatient visits by people with HIV at four sites, using a validated system. In models adjusting for site and patient characteristics, with provider as a random effect, providers were more "verbally dominant" with Black patients than with others. There was more discussion about ARV adherence with both Black and Hispanic patients, but no more discussion about strategies to improve adherence. Providers made more directive utterances discussing ARV treatment with Hispanic patients. Possible interpretations of these findings are that providers are less confident in Black and Hispanic patients to be adherent; that they place too much confidence in their White, non-Hispanic patients; or that patients differentially want such discussion. The lack of specific problem solving and high provider directiveness suggests areas for improvement.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 67 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 26%
Student > Master 11 16%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Professor 4 6%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 13 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 13%
Psychology 9 13%
Social Sciences 9 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 14 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. 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 21 May 2014.
All research outputs
#492,458
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#41
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,281
of 311,722 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#2
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
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 311,722 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.