↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating PROMIS® instruments and methods for patient-centered outcomes research: Patient and provider voices in a substance use treatment setting

Overview of attention for article published in Quality of Life Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 Mendeley
Title
Evaluating PROMIS® instruments and methods for patient-centered outcomes research: Patient and provider voices in a substance use treatment setting
Published in
Quality of Life Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11136-015-1131-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly L. Johnston, Suzanne M. Lawrence, Nathan E. Dodds, Lan Yu, Dennis C. Daley, Paul A. Pilkonis

Abstract

Our work as a primary research site of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(®)), combined with support from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, allowed us to evaluate the real-world applicability and acceptability of PROMIS measures in an addiction medicine setting. As part of a 3-month prospective observational study, 225 outpatients at a substance abuse treatment clinic completed PROMIS item banks for alcohol use (as well as 15 additional item banks from 8 other PROMIS domains, including emotional distress, sleep, and pain), with assessments at intake, 1-month follow-up, and 3-month follow-up. A subsample of therapists and their patients completed health domain importance ratings and qualitative interviews to elicit feedback regarding the content and format of the patients' assessment results. The importance ratings revealed that depression, anxiety, and lack of emotional support were rated highest of the non-alcohol-related domains among both patients and clinicians. General alcohol use was considered most important by both patients and clinicians. Based on their suggestions, changes were made to item response feedback to facilitate comprehension and communication. Both therapists and patients agreed that their review of the graphical display of scores, as well as individual item responses, helped them to identify areas of greatest concern and was useful for treatment planning. The results of our pilot work demonstrated the value and practicality of incorporating a comprehensive health assessment within a substance abuse treatment setting.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 104 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 25%
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 18 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Neuroscience 6 6%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 27 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,346,908
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Quality of Life Research
#1,680
of 2,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,594
of 267,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality of Life Research
#35
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 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 2,846 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. 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 267,220 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 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.