↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Oncology providers’ perspectives on endocrine therapy prescribing and management

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Oncology providers’ perspectives on endocrine therapy prescribing and management
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, September 2016
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s95594
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie B Wheeler, Megan C Roberts, Diane Bloom, Katherine E Reeder-Hayes, Maya Espada, Jeffrey Peppercorn, Carol E Golin, Jo Anne Earp

Abstract

Adjuvant endocrine therapy (ET) can reduce the risk of recurrence among females with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Overall, initiation and adherence to ET are suboptimal, though reasons are not well described. The study's objective was to better understand ET decision making, prescribing, and patient management from oncology providers' perspectives. Using purposive sampling, we recruited oncology providers who saw five or more breast cancer patients per week (n=20). We conducted 30-45-minute telephone interviews, using a semistructured guide to elicit perspectives on ET use. We used thematic content analysis to systematically identify categories of meaning and double-coded transcripts using Atlas.ti. Providers recommend ET to all eligible patients except those with contraindications or other risk factors. Providers base their ET prescribing decisions on the patient's menopausal status, side effects, and comorbidities. ET is typically discussed multiple times: at the onset of breast cancer treatment and in more detail after other treatment completion. Providers felt that the associated recurrence risk reduction is the most compelling argument for patients during ET decision making. While providers rarely perceived noninitiation as a problem, nonadherence was prevalent, often due to unresolvable side effects. From the clinicians' perspectives, side effects from ET are the dominant factor in nonadherence. Efforts to improve adherence should focus on strategies to minimize side effects and ensure clinicians and patients are well informed regarding optimal side effect management. This finding has important implications for novel endocrine regimens that offer improved outcomes through longer duration or more intensive therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Psychology 4 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 15 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,385,802
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#964
of 1,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#215,331
of 337,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#52
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,606 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 337,406 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.