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 |
Which Clinician Questions Elicit Accurate Disclosure of Antiretroviral Non-adherence When Talking to Patients?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AIDS and Behavior, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10461-015-1231-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wynne Callon, Somnath Saha, P. Todd Korthuis, Ira B. Wilson, Richard D. Moore, Jonathan Cohn, Mary Catherine Beach |
| Abstract |
This study evaluated how clinicians assess antiretroviral (ARV) adherence in clinical encounters, and which questions elicit accurate responses. We conducted conversation analysis of audio-recorded encounters between 34 providers and 58 patients reporting ARV non-adherence in post-encounter interviews. Among 42 visits where adherence status was unknown by providers, 4 providers did not discuss ARVs (10 %), 6 discussed ARVs but did not elicit non-adherence disclosure (14 %), and 32 discussed ARVs which prompted disclosure (76 %). Questions were classified as: (1) clarification of medication ("Are you still taking the Combivir?"); (2) broad ("How's it going with your meds?"); (3) positively-framed ("Are you taking your medications regularly?"); (4) negatively-framed ("Have you missed any doses?"). Clinicians asked 75 ARV-related questions: 23 clarification, 12 broad, 17 positively-framed, and 23 negatively-framed. Negatively-framed questions were 3.8 times more likely to elicit accurate disclosure than all other question types (p < 0.0001). Providers can improve disclosure probability by asking directly about missed doses. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 22% |
| Unknown | 6 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 14% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,572,005
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#2,846
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,789
of 286,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#38
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 286,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.