| Title |
Examining whether the information–motivation–behavioral skills model predicts medication adherence for patients with a rare disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s115272 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dayna S Alexander, Susan L Hogan, Joanne M Jordan, Robert F DeVellis, Delesha M Carpenter |
| Abstract |
The information-motivation-behavioral skills (IMB) model has been used to explain and promote medication adherence among patients with diabetes and HIV. The objective of this study was to examine whether the IMB model predicted medication adherence among vasculitis patients. Adult vasculitis patients (n=228) completed online questionnaires at baseline and 3-month follow-up. Linear regressions were calculated to determine the direct effects of information and motivation on medication adherence (P<0.05). A mediation analysis using a bootstrapping approach was used to test whether behavioral skills significantly mediated the effect of information and motivation on medication adherence. Participants reported high levels of information (M=4.0; standard deviation [SD]=0.68), moderate levels of motivation (M=2.7; SD=1.00), and high levels of behavioral skills (M=4.1; SD=0.74). In the regression model, only behavioral skills (B=0.38; P<0.001) were significantly associated with medication adherence; however, mediation analysis revealed that behavioral skills significantly mediated the effects of information and motivation on medication adherence. The results support the IMB-hypothesized relationships between information, motivation, behavioral skills, and medication adherence in our sample. Findings suggest that providers should work with vasculitis patients to increase their medication-related skills to improve medication adherence. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 25% |
| Italy | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 71 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 20% |
| Unknown | 22 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Psychology | 4 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 26 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 May 2017.
All research outputs
#4,872,212
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#301
of 1,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,658
of 422,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#8
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 422,901 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.