↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Assessing the feasibility and quality of shared decision making in China: evaluating a clinical encounter intervention for Chinese patients

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Assessing the feasibility and quality of shared decision making in China: evaluating a clinical encounter intervention for Chinese patients
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, November 2016
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s115115
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rongchong Huang, Xiantao Song, Jian Wu, Wei Huang, Aaron L Leppin, Michael R Gionfriddo, Yongxian Liu, Kasey R Boehmer, Henry H Ting, Victor M Montori

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using the Statin Choice decision aid to have discussions about starting a statin medication for cardiovascular risk reduction in Chinese patients with stable coronary artery diseases. A prospective, pilot study of the Statin Choice decision aid in two teaching hospitals in Northern China was conducted. A total of seven clinicians were enrolled and underwent a 12-hour, group-based, in-person training on shared decision making (SDM) and the Statin Choice decision aid. Then, these clinicians used the Statin Choice decision aid in patients during a clinical encounter. A total of 86 patients aged 40-80 years, who had stable angina, were enrolled. All clinical encounters were video recorded. A team of three researchers viewed and scored all the encounter recordings to evaluate the SDM process and fidelity to the intervention using the OPTION scale and Fidelity scale, respectively. All the patients were followed up for 12 months to record adherence to statin and any major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). The average scores on the OPTION normalized score and Fidelity scale were 21 (range, 3-32; out of a possible, 48) and 10 (range, 6-10; out of a possible, 10), respectively. This suggested that Chinese clinicians who were using Statin Choice in their patients were able to exhibit behaviors consistent with SDM at a level that is similar to that reported in Western countries. After SDM, the statin adherence was 94.5% (69/73), and the proportion of MACEs was 2.9% (2/69). Using an encounter decision aid developed in the US, it was feasible to implement SDM in a referral cardiology practice in Mainland China. Further work to ensure that the encounter aid is pertinent to the Chinese population and that SDM is tested in at-risk patients could contribute to the implementation of SDM across Mainland China.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 20%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 13 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 December 2016.
All research outputs
#8,267,700
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#588
of 1,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,039
of 318,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#19
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,733 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. 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 318,337 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 59% of its contemporaries.