↓ Skip to main content

Quality of Life Assessment in Multiple Sclerosis: Different Perception between Patients and Neurologists

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
38 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
161 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
Quality of Life Assessment in Multiple Sclerosis: Different Perception between Patients and Neurologists
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2017.00729
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria C. Ysrraelit, Marcela P. Fiol, Maria I. Gaitán, Jorge Correale

Abstract

In recent years, neurologists are noticing that evaluation of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients based on combining relapses, disability progression, and magnetic resonance imaging activity may be insufficient to adequately assess suboptimal responses to available therapy. Inclusion of quality of life (QoL) parameters may contribute to breach this gap. To evaluate agreement levels between doctor and patient perception of QoL in MS. A total of 700 MS patients and 300 neurologists were invited to participate in a cross-sectional study by answering an e-mail questionnaire. The survey collected information on demographical data and included the Short Form questionnaire (SF-36). After completing the questionnaire, patients were given a standard written description of each of the subdomains assessed by SF-36 and asked to identify which three were the most important determinants of their overall health-related QoL. A total of 135 neurologists and 380 MS patients responded the survey. Study population mean age was 42.1 ± 10.5 years, with 61% presenting relapsing-remitting MS. SF-36 results were physical function 68.4 ± 30, physical role limitation 56.8 ± 41.7, vitality 47.6 ± 21.4, pain 71.2 ± 26.1, social function 72.6 ± 28.6, emotional role limitation 63.2 ± 39.8, mental health 60 ± 14.1, and general health 55.8 ± 22. Doctors considered physical function (75%) and physical role limitation (70%) as the most important QoL determinants in MS, followed by emotional role limitation (52%). Patients however, assigned significantly different levels of importance to physical function (58%), and physical role limitation (46%) and considered vitality (52%) more important than their physicians (p < 0.001). Important to note, the results of SF-36 questionnaire were highly correlated with the perception gap between patients and neurologists (r = 0.89; p = 0.0004). Concerns on QoL in MS are different for patients and physicians. It is essential to enhance communication in order to better understand actual patient needs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 38 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 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 161 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 27 17%
Student > Master 22 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 12%
Unspecified 16 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 36 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 14%
Unspecified 18 11%
Psychology 15 9%
Neuroscience 11 7%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 47 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 01 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,467,737
of 25,380,089 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#525
of 14,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,697
of 456,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#9
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,380,089 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 456,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.