↓ Skip to main content

The Journal of Rheumatology

Evaluation of Self-reported Patient Experiences: Insights from Digital Patient Communities in Psoriatic Arthritis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Rheumatology, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of Self-reported Patient Experiences: Insights from Digital Patient Communities in Psoriatic Arthritis
Published in
Journal of Rheumatology, February 2018
DOI 10.3899/jrheum.170500
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prashanth Sunkureddi, Stephen Doogan, John Heid, Samir Benosman, Alexis Ogdie, Layne Martin, Jacqueline B Palmer

Abstract

To evaluate the types of experiences and treatment access challenges of patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using self-reported online narratives. English-language patient narratives reported between January 2010 and May 2016 were collected from 31 online sources (general health social networking sites, disease-focused patient forums, treatment reviews, general health forums, mainstream social media sites) for analysis of functional impairment and 40 online sources for assessment of barriers to treatment. Using natural language processing and manual curation, patient-reported experiences were categorized into 6 high-level concepts of functional impairment [social, physical, emotional, cognitive, role activity (SPEC-R), and general] and 6 categories to determine barriers to treatment access (coverage ineligibility, out-of-pocket cost, issues with assistance programs, clinical ineligibility, formulary placement/sequence, doctor guidance). The SPEC-R categorization was also applied to 3 validated PsA patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to evaluate their capacity to collect lower-level subconcepts extracted from patient narratives. Of 15,390 narratives collected from 3139 patients with PsA for exploratory analysis, physical concepts were the most common (81.5%), followed by emotional (50.7%), cognitive (20.0%), role activity (8.1%), and social (5.6%) concepts. Cognitive impairments and disease burden on family and parenting were not recorded by PsA PRO instruments. The most commonly cited barriers to treatment were coverage ineligibility (51.6%) and high out-of-pocket expenses (31.7%). Patients often discussed physical and emotional implications of PsA in online platforms; some commonly used PRO instruments in PsA may not identify cognitive issues or parenting/family burden. Nearly one-third of patients with PsA reported access barriers to treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 92 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 30 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 13%
Psychology 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Computer Science 4 4%
Other 22 24%
Unknown 30 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 26 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,330,880
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Rheumatology
#342
of 3,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,731
of 470,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Rheumatology
#8
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 470,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.