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 |
The design of a low literacy decision aid about rheumatoid arthritis medications developed in three languages for use during the clinical encounter
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12911-014-0104-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jennifer L Barton, Christopher J Koenig, Gina Evans-Young, Laura Trupin, Jennie Anderson, Dana Ragouzeos, Maggie Breslin, Timothy Morse, Dean Schillinger, Victor M Montori, Edward H Yelin |
| Abstract |
BackgroundShared decision-making in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) care is a priority among policy makers, clinicians and patients both nationally and internationally. Demands on patients to have basic knowledge of RA, treatment options, and details of risk and benefit when making medication decisions with clinicians can be overwhelming, especially for those with limited literacy or limited English language proficiency. The objective of this study is to describe the development of a medication choice decision aid for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in three languages using low literacy principles.MethodsBased on the development of a diabetes decision aid, the RA decision aid (RA Choice) was developed through a collaborative process involving patients, clinicians, designers, decision-aid and health literacy experts. A combination of evidence synthesis and direct observation of clinician-patient interactions generated content and guided an iterative process of prototype development.ResultsThree iterations of RA Choice were developed and field-tested before completion. The final tool organized data using icons and plain language for 12 RA medications across 5 issues: frequency of administration, time to onset, cost, side effects, and special considerations. The tool successfully created a conversation between clinician and patient, and garnered high acceptability from clinicians.ConclusionsThe process of collaboratively developing an RA decision aid designed to promote shared decision making resulted in a graphically-enhanced, low literacy tool. The use of RA Choice in the clinical encounter has the potential to enhance communication for RA patients, including those with limited health literacy and limited English language proficiency. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 | 3 | 38% |
| India | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 50% |
| Scientists | 3 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
| Researcher | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 21% |
| Unknown | 14 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 10% |
| Psychology | 6 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 18 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 13 January 2016.
All research outputs
#6,614,214
of 24,244,537 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#589
of 2,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,578
of 370,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#12
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,244,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 370,631 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.