↓ Skip to main content

Adherence to Chronic Disease Medications among New York City Medicaid Participants

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Urban Health, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
Adherence to Chronic Disease Medications among New York City Medicaid Participants
Published in
Journal of Urban Health, June 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11524-012-9724-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelly A. Kyanko, Robert H. Franklin, Sonia Y. Angell

Abstract

Medication adherence is critical for cardiovascular disease prevention and control. Local health departments are well positioned to address adherence issues, however relevant baseline data and a mechanism for monitoring impact of interventions are lacking. We performed a retrospective analysis using New York State Medicaid claims from 2008 to 2009 to describe rates and predictors of adherence among New York City Medicaid participants with dyslipidemia, diabetes, or hypertension. Adherence was measured using the medication possession ratio, and multivariable logistic regression was used to assess factors related to adherence. Medication regimen adherence was 63%. Greater adherence was observed in those who were older, male, and taking medications from ≥3 drug classes. Compared with whites, blacks and Hispanics were less likely to be adherent (adjusted odds ratio [OR]=0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-0.70 and adjusted OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.73-0.78, respectively), while Asians were as likely. Medication adherence was inadequate and racial disparities were identified in NYC Medicaid participants on stable medication regimens for chronic disease. This study demonstrates a claims-based model that may be used by local health departments to monitor and evaluate efforts to improve adherence and reduce disparities.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 61 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Student > Master 8 13%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 18 28%
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 25 June 2012.
All research outputs
#15,246,403
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#1,101
of 1,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,726
of 164,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#40
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 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 1,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.3. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 164,330 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.