| Title |
Exploring the concept of patient centred communication for the pharmacy practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-017-0508-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Majanne Wolters, Rolf van Hulten, Lyda Blom, Marcel L. Bouvy |
| Abstract |
Background Patient centred communication can improve pharmaceutical care, but is not well described for pharmacists. Aim of the review To provide a comprehensive and accessible overview of the concept of patient centred communication for the pharmacy practice. Method A scoping review and thematic analysis was undertaken to synthesize the extracted data and present it in a model. Results Literature search and selection resulted in eighteen articles. Thematic analysis of the extracted data led to five categories regarding patient centred communication. Two categories refer to phases of a pharmaceutical consultation: (1) shared problem defining and (2) shared decision making; three refer to underlying concepts and assumptions about patient centredness regarding (3) the patient, (4) the pharmacist and (5) the therapeutic relation. The categories were modelled in the so called Utrecht's Model for Patient centred communication in the Pharmacy. Conclusion Although there might be barriers to implement patient centred communication in the pharmacy, the concept of patient centred communication as described in the literature is relevant for the pharmacy practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 82 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 11% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 27 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 25 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 July 2023.
All research outputs
#13,738,704
of 23,996,152 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#656
of 1,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,590
of 319,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#10
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,996,152 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,185 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 319,316 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.