| Title |
Antidepressants in primary care: patients’ experiences, perceptions, self-efficacy beliefs, and nonadherence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s53748 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hans Wouters, Marcel L Bouvy, Erica CG Van Geffen, Helga Gardarsdottir, Anne M Stiggelbout, Liset Van Dijk |
| Abstract |
Patient adherence to antidepressants is poor. However, this is rather unsurprising, given the equivocal efficacy, side effects, and practical problems of antidepressants. The aim of this study was to examine a wide array of patient experiences and perceptions regarding the efficacy, side effects, and practical problems of antidepressants, as well as their associations with nonadherence, and whether patients' perceived self-efficacy moderated these associations. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 17% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 21% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 28% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 13% |
| Psychology | 5 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
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 12 February 2014.
All research outputs
#8,186,312
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#598
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,835
of 322,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#12
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. 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 322,718 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 67% of its contemporaries.