| Title |
A Review of Patient Preferences for Osteoporosis Drug Treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Rheumatology Reports, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11926-015-0533-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mickaël Hiligsmann, Sandrine P. G. Bours, Annelies Boonen |
| Abstract |
Poor medication adherence is a major problem in chronic diseases such as osteoporosis that may partially be due to unaddressed patient values and preferences. Data on patient preferences could help clinicians to improve medication adherence and could also be useful in policy decisions and guideline development. This paper aims to identify literature reporting on the preferences of patients for osteoporosis drug medications. Several methods have been used to elicit patient preferences for medications and their characteristics including qualitative research, survey with ranking/rating exercises, discrete-choice experiments and clinical studies (crossover designs, open-label study). All these studies revealed that osteoporotic patients have preferences for medications and their attributes, in particular for less-frequent dosing regimens. Interestingly, variations in the preferences of patients were observed in most studies, suggesting the importance to take into account individual preference in decision-making to improve osteoporosis care. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 48 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 20% |
| Researcher | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 32% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 32% |
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 23 September 2015.
All research outputs
#18,427,608
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Current Rheumatology Reports
#554
of 710 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,847
of 266,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Rheumatology Reports
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 710 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 266,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.