| Title |
Predicting treatment course and outcome using a promotion and prevention framework in a community sample of arthritis sufferers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s161144 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dan V Blalock, Patrick E McKnight, Todd B Kashdan, Simone C Franz |
| Abstract |
The present study examined the proposition that patients need to focus on something beyond simply "getting better". In a sample of arthritis sufferers, we distinguished individuals by the goals that motivated them - moving toward aspirational goals and maximizing gains (promotion focus) rather than obligations and minimizing losses (prevention focus) - and how these motivational styles influenced treatment. Patients (N=254) participated in a randomized controlled trial of resistance training and self-management, providing 6 time points of data over 2 years. Promotion and prevention focus at baseline were used to predict the course (compliance and changes in coping self-efficacy) and outcome (changes in physical functioning) of treatment. Arthritis sufferers with strong promotion orientations showed significant improvements in physical functioning (a direct positive impact on physical health); there were no significant associations with treatment compliance and coping self-efficacy. Arthritis sufferers with strong prevention orientations complied less with the treatment and showed little change in coping self-efficacy during treatment, which, in turn, predicted worse physical functioning over time (a pernicious, indirect influence on treatment outcome). A focus on positive approach-oriented goals may improve overall treatment response, whereas a focus on negative avoidance-oriented goals may degrade treatment response through reduced compliance and self-efficacy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 28% |
| Psychology | 2 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
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 21 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,065
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,357
of 342,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#35
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 342,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.