↓ Skip to main content

Amsterdam tool for clinical medication review: development and testing of a comprehensive tool for pharmacists and general practitioners

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
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.
Title
Amsterdam tool for clinical medication review: development and testing of a comprehensive tool for pharmacists and general practitioners
Published in
BMC Research Notes, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1566-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruth Mast, Abeer Ahmad, Sacha C. Hoogenboom, Walter Cambach, Petra J. M. Elders, Giel Nijpels, Jacqueline G. Hugtenburg

Abstract

Drug-related problems are prevalent among older patients, and substantially increase the risk of morbidity, (re-)hospitalisation and mortality. To detect drug-related problems and optimize treatment primary caregivers should periodically review the medication of older patients. The aim was to develop a structured, comprehensive but practicable tool to facilitate and support the reviewing of medication of older patients with a chronic disease by pharmacists and general practitioners. A tool facilitating clinical medication review by community pharmacists was developed on the basis of treatment guidelines, literature data on drug-related problems. For the identification of drug-related problems from the patient's perspective, a script for structured interviews was developed. The tool was optimized by means of a Delphi method with an expert panel and testing in a trial. The medication review tool consists of a comprehensive checklist of 124 drug-related problems divided by 20 sections according to physiological systems and diseases, and includes a structured interview script for a patient interviews. A structured, comprehensive and practical tool to assist pharmacists and general practitioners to perform clinical medication review including a list of potential drug-related problems in older patients with chronic disease, as well as a script for structured patient interviews, was developed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 28 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Student > Bachelor 6 19%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 5 16%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Unspecified 3 10%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Other 2 6%

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 December 2015.
All research outputs
#7,855,331
of 12,519,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,423
of 2,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,404
of 345,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#193
of 404 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,519,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,804 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 345,467 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 404 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.