↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Patient-reported outcome assessment of inflammatory arthritis patient experience with intravenously administered biologic therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Patient-reported outcome assessment of inflammatory arthritis patient experience with intravenously administered biologic therapy
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, September 2017
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s136567
Pubmed ID
Authors

Norman B Gaylis, Joanne Sagliani, Shawn Black, Kezhen L Tang, Raphael DeHoratius, Wesley A Kafka, Dennis Parenti

Abstract

To evaluate patient perspectives regarding utilization of intravenous (IV) therapy for inflammatory arthritis (IA). This was a single-center, noninterventional, patient questionnaire-based study of adult IA patients currently receiving IV biologics. At a single visit, patients completed the questionnaire comprising 30 questions centered on their experience receiving an intravenously administered therapy to treat their IA. The questionnaire included questions on patient demographics, disease characteristics, and previous biologic treatment for IA (subcutaneous [SC] and IV). Patients rated their level of agreement with statements regarding satisfaction with current IV biologic therapy and potential advantages and disadvantages of IV biologic therapy using a 5-point Likert scale (1= strongly disagree, 5= strongly agree). One hundred patients were enrolled and completed the survey; 66% were female and the mean age was 58 years. Before IV treatment, 97% of patients received information regarding therapy options. Ninety patients ranked their satisfaction with current IV therapy as 4 or 5. The proportion of patients with an "extremely favorable" perception of IV therapy increased from 33% to 71% following initiation of their current medication. Thirty-one patients had previously received SC therapies to treat their IA. These results demonstrated an overall favorable perception of IV therapy among this patient population. Patients previously treated with SC therapy also had a positive shift in the perception of IV therapy after initiating IV therapy. Patients' perception and preference for treatment options should be highly considered by the treating physician during or as part of a shared decision-making process.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 36%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 21%
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 29%
Unspecified 2 14%
Social Sciences 2 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Other 0 0%

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 14 September 2017.
All research outputs
#9,406,701
of 11,768,109 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#801
of 965 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,268
of 265,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#31
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,768,109 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 965 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 265,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.