↓ Skip to main content

Opinions on the use of technology to improve tablet taking in >65-year-old patients on cardiovascular medications

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of International Medical Research, May 2018
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 (#25 of 2,311)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
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.
Title
Opinions on the use of technology to improve tablet taking in >65-year-old patients on cardiovascular medications
Published in
Journal of International Medical Research, May 2018
DOI 10.1177/0300060518770578
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anita Holender, Stephen Sutton, Anna De Simoni

Abstract

Objective This study was performed to evaluate the perceptions of the use of technology to improve cardiovascular medicine taking among patients aged >65 years. Methods This qualitative study used focus groups with people aged >65 years taking cardiovascular medications from two East London community centres. Thematic analysis was informed by the Perceptions and Practicalities Approach framework. Results Participants welcomed technologies they considered familiar, accessible, and easy to use. They valued the opportunity to receive alerts to help with forgetting and monitoring their treatment. More advanced technologies such as ingestible sensor systems were considered helpful for elderly people with significant cognitive impairments still living in the community because of improved monitoring by caregivers and clinicians and prolonging independence. Although generally adapting to the increase in technology in everyday life, participants raised a number of concerns that included potential reduction in face-to-face communication, data security, becoming dependent on technology, and worrying about the consequences of technological failure. Conclusions Participants raised a number of concerns and practical barriers that would need to be addressed for technologies to be accepted and adopted in this patient group.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 7 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Other 20 21%
Unknown 28 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 15%
Psychology 9 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 6%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 34 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 70. 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 04 July 2019.
All research outputs
#569,143
of 24,230,934 outputs
Outputs from Journal of International Medical Research
#25
of 2,311 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,434
of 331,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of International Medical Research
#2
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,230,934 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 2,311 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. 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 331,812 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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 98% of its contemporaries.