You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The INCATM (Inhaler Compliance AssessmentTM): A comparison with established measures of adherence†
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychology & Health, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1080/08870446.2017.1290243 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine Moran, Frank Doyle, Imran Sulaiman, Kathleen Bennett, Garrett Greene, Gerard J. Molloy, Richard B. Reilly, Richard W. Costello, Lisa Mellon |
| Abstract |
To compare the Inhaler Compliance Assessment(TM) (INCA(TM)), a novel audio-recording device objectively measuring timing and proficiency of inhaler use, against established adherence measures, and explore its discriminant and predictive validity. Prospective observational study; 184 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients used an INCA(TM)-enabled salmeterol/fluticasone inhaler for one-month post-hospital discharge. INCA(TM) (Attempted, Attempted Interval, Actual) adherence correlated with Doses Used Rate, self-reported adherence and prescription refill for concurrent validity. Discriminant validity for reason for admission, cognition and lung function; predictive validity for health status and quality-of-life. Rates of Attempted, Attempted Interval and Actual adherence were 59, 47 and 23%, respectively. Only 7% of participants had Actual adherence >80%. INCA(TM) variables significantly correlated with Doses Used Rate but not with self-report; Attempted and Attempted Interval were weakly associated with prescription refill. Higher cognitive and lung functioning groups had better INCA(TM) adherence. Attempted and Attempted Interval predicted health status, while Doses Used Rate predicted quality-of-life. INCA(TM) did not strongly correlate with self-report or prescription refill data. Discriminant and predictive validity demonstrated by INCA(TM) suggests the potential utility of the INCA(TM) as a method to identify intentional and unintentional adherence to inhaled medication and facilitate targeted intervention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 4 | 36% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 6 | 55% |
| Members of the public | 5 | 45% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 27 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 13% |
| Psychology | 6 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 28 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 October 2017.
All research outputs
#4,833,258
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Psychology & Health
#365
of 1,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,372
of 324,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychology & Health
#14
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,166 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 324,194 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.