| 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, Ines Vogel, Sabine Ludt, Joachim Szecsenyi, Tobias Freund |
| 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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 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 | 57 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 8 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 8% |
| Psychology | 4 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
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
#16,737,737
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,001
of 1,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,685
of 202,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#14
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,759 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 202,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.