↓ Skip to main content

Decision-making in Multiple Sclerosis: The Role of Aversion to Ambiguity for Therapeutic Inertia among Neurologists (DIScUTIR MS)

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Decision-making in Multiple Sclerosis: The Role of Aversion to Ambiguity for Therapeutic Inertia among Neurologists (DIScUTIR MS)
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00065
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gustavo Saposnik, Angel P. Sempere, Daniel Prefasi, Daniel Selchen, Christian C. Ruff, Jorge Maurino, Philippe N. Tobler

Abstract

Limited information is available on physician-related factors influencing therapeutic inertia (TI) in multiple sclerosis (MS). Our aim was to evaluate whether physicians' risk preferences are associated with TI in MS care, by applying concepts from behavioral economics. In this cross-sectional study, participants answered questions regarding the management of 20 MS case scenarios, completed 3 surveys, and 4 experimental paradigms based on behavioral economics. Surveys and experiments included standardized measures of aversion ambiguity in financial and health domains, physicians' reactions to uncertainty in patient care, and questions related to risk preferences in different domains. The primary outcome was TI when physicians faced a need for escalating therapy based on clinical (new relapse) and magnetic resonance imaging activity while patients were on a disease-modifying agent. Of 161 neurologists who were invited to participate in the project, 136 cooperated with the study (cooperation rate 84.5%) and 96 completed the survey (response rate: 60%). TI was present in 68.8% of participants. Similar results were observed for definitions of TI based on modified Rio or clinical progression. Aversion to ambiguity was associated with higher prevalence of TI (86.4% with high aversion to ambiguity vs. 63.5% with lower or no aversion to ambiguity; p = 0.042). In multivariate analyses, high aversion to ambiguity was the strongest predictor of TI (OR 7.39; 95%CI 1.40-38.9), followed by low tolerance to uncertainty (OR 3.47; 95%CI 1.18-10.2). TI is a common phenomenon affecting nearly 7 out of 10 physicians caring for MS patients. Higher prevalence of TI was associated with physician's strong aversion to ambiguity and low tolerance of uncertainty.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Master 6 10%
Professor 6 10%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 17 29%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 25%
Psychology 11 19%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 7%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 13 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 May 2018.
All research outputs
#6,876,468
of 24,187,394 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,474
of 13,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,866
of 315,032 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#46
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,187,394 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 315,032 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 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 66% of its contemporaries.