↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Let’s talk about medication: concordance in rating medication adherence among multimorbid patients and their general practitioners

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, November 2012
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
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Let’s talk about medication: concordance in rating medication adherence among multimorbid patients and their general practitioners
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, November 2012
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s35498
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dominik Ose, Cornelia Mahler, Vogel, Ludt, Freund, Szecsenyi

Abstract

Medication adherence can be essential for improving health outcomes. Patients with multiple chronic conditions, often receiving multiple medications, are at higher risk for medication nonadherence. Previous research has focused on concordance between patients and providers about which medication should be taken. However, the question of whether patients and providers are concordant in rating actual medication intake has not been answered as yet. This study aimed to explore the extent and predictors of patient - provider concordance in rating medication adherence in patients with multiple chronic conditions.

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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 52 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 14 25%
Unknown 3 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 9%
Psychology 4 7%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 5 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 November 2012.
All research outputs
#1,808,885
of 3,628,714 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#194
of 334 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,319
of 275,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#9
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 3,628,714 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 334 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 275,517 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.