| Title |
Exploring preferences for domain-specific goal management in patients with polyarthritis: what to do when an important goal becomes threatened?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Rheumatology International, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00296-015-3336-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Roos Y. Arends, Christina Bode, Erik Taal, Mart A. F. J. Van de Laar |
| Abstract |
Usually priorities in goal management-intended to minimize discrepancies between a given and desired situation-are studied as person characteristics, neglecting possible domain-specific aspects. However, people may make different decisions in different situations depending on the importance of the personal issues at stake. Aim of the present study therefore was to develop arthritis-related vignettes to examine domain-specific goal management and to explore patients' preferences. Based on interviews and literature, situation-specific hypothetical stories were developed in which the main character encounters a problem with a valued goal due to arthritis. Thirty-one patients (61 % female, mean age 60 years) evaluated the face validity of the newly developed vignettes. Secondly, 262 patients (60 % female, mean age 63 years) were asked to come up with possible solutions for the problems with attaining a goal described in a subset of the vignettes. Goal management strategies within the responses and the preference for the various strategies were identified. The 11 developed vignettes in three domains were found to be face-valid. In 90 % of the responses, goal management strategies were identified (31 % goal maintenance, 29 % goal adjustment, 21 % goal disengagement, and 10 % goal re-engagement). Strategy preference was related to domains. Solutions containing goal disengagement were the least preferred. Using vignettes for measuring domain-specific goal management appears as valuable addition to the existing questionnaires. The vignettes can be used to study how patients with arthritis cope with threatened goals in specific domains from a patient's perspective. Domain-specific strategy preference emphasizes the importance of a situation-specific instrument. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 10% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 20% |
| Psychology | 10 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 August 2015.
All research outputs
#15,342,608
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Rheumatology International
#1,539
of 2,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,012
of 264,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Rheumatology International
#10
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 264,494 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.