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 |
Patient decision roles in insulin initiation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nursing Practice, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1111/ijn.12355 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yew Kong Lee, Wah Yun Low, Ping Yein Lee, Chirk Jenn Ng |
| Abstract |
Patient decision-making role preference (DMRP) is a patient's preferred degree of control when making medical decisions. This descriptive qualitative study aimed to explore Malaysian patients' views on their DMRP. Between January 2011 and March 2012, 22 individual face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted with patients with type 2 diabetes who were deciding about insulin initiation. The interviews were audio-recorded and analysed using a thematic approach. The age range of participants was 28-67 years old with 11 men. Ten patients preferred to make the decision themselves, six patients indicated that the clinician should make the decision and only one patient expressed a preference for a collaborative role. The following factors influenced DMRP: trust in clinicians, responsibility for diabetes care, level of knowledge and awareness, involvement of family and personal characteristics. In conclusion, the concept of shared decision-making is still alien, and a more participative communication style might help to facilitate patients' expression of DMRP. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 68 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 9% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 19% |
| Unknown | 8 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 9% |
| Psychology | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 17% |
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 08 May 2014.
All research outputs
#19,946,609
of 24,514,423 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nursing Practice
#555
of 729 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,976
of 232,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nursing Practice
#30
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,514,423 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 729 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 232,262 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.