↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Barriers and perceived limitations to early treatment of hemophilia

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Blood Medicine, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Barriers and perceived limitations to early treatment of hemophilia
Published in
Journal of Blood Medicine, May 2013
DOI 10.2147/jbm.s43734
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kapil Saxena

Abstract

Early treatment of bleeds in hemophilia patients, both with and without inhibitors, has been shown to be of immense benefit in the overall clinical outcome. Despite the advantages of treating the bleeding episodes early, significant barriers and limitations remain. The aim of this review is to highlight the various barriers and perceived limitations to early therapy of bleeding episodes, especially in patients who have developed inhibitors to factor VIII. The peer-reviewed literature was searched for articles on hemophilia patients, with and without inhibitors, and early treatment, to identify the barriers to early treatment and potential impact on patient outcomes. The most important barrier is the educational barrier, which involves lack of awareness among patients regarding the signs of a bleed, as well as importance of early therapy. It is also common for parents or caregivers of school-age children to exhibit inconvenience and scheduling barriers. Distance to the treatment center can also play a role here. Some patients experience financial barriers related to cost of clotting factor products, insurance coverage, or insurance caps and out-of-pocket costs. Rarely, there can also be problems related to venous access or home infusion. Lastly, multiple psychosocial barriers can prevent adherence to treatment regimens. Identification and addressing these individual barriers will result in improved compliance rates, prevent joint damage, be more cost-effective, and lead to better overall health of these patients.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 94 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 14 15%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 26 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 29 31%
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 08 November 2022.
All research outputs
#7,310,874
of 23,056,273 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Blood Medicine
#99
of 293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,594
of 193,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Blood Medicine
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,056,273 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 293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. 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 193,600 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.