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 |
What determines adherence to treatment in cardiovascular disease prevention? Protocol for a mixed methods preference study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMJ Open, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000372 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephen Jan, Tim Usherwood, Jo Anne Brien, David Peiris, John Rose, Noel Hayman, Kirsten Howard, Julie Redfern, Tracey Laba, Alan Cass, Anushka Patel |
| Abstract |
Background Significant gaps exist between guidelines-recommended therapies for cardiovascular disease prevention and current practice. Fixed-dose combination pills ('polypills') potentially improve adherence to therapy. This study is a preference study undertaken in conjunction with a clinical trial of a polypill and seeks to examine the underlying reasons for variations in treatment adherence to recommended therapy. Methods/design A preference study comprising: (1) Discrete Choice Experiment for patients; and (2) qualitative study of patients and providers. Both components will be conducted on participants in the trial. A joint model combining the observed adherence in the clinical trial (revealed preference) and the Discrete Choice Experiment data (stated preference) will be estimated. Estimates will be made of the marginal effect (importance) of each attribute on overall choice, the extent to which respondents are prepared to trade-off one attribute for another and predicted values of the level of adherence given a fixed set of attributes, and contextual and socio-demographic characteristics. For the qualitative study, a thematic analysis will be used as a means of exploring in depth the preferences and ultimately provide important narratives on the experiences and perspectives of individuals with regard to adherence behaviour. Ethics and dissemination Primary ethics approval was received from Sydney South West Area Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (Royal Prince Alfred Hospital zone). In addition to usual scientific forums, the findings will be reported back to the communities involved in the studies through site-specific reports and oral presentations. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 46 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 24% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 39% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
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 03 November 2011.
All research outputs
#13,356,164
of 22,655,397 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#14,290
of 22,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,862
of 140,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#39
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,655,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 140,441 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.