| Title |
Japanese physicians’ preferences for decision making in rheumatoid arthritis treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s95346 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Akiko Aoki, Sadayoshi Ohbu |
| Abstract |
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a complex chronic illness requiring continued medical care. During the past decade, the therapeutic options for RA have increased significantly; these often have a higher risk of adverse effects and are more expensive than traditional drugs. Rheumatologists may hence face difficulties when deciding on the optimal modality in initiating or changing treatment. The aim of this study was to explore the Japanese physicians' usual style of and preferences for decision making regarding RA treatment. This was a cross-sectional study conducted using an Internet survey. Respondents were asked about their usual style of making treatment decisions (perceived style), and their perception of the importance of physicians' actions and patients' attitudes. Of the 485 physicians who were sent the questionnaire, 157 responded completely (response rate: 32.3%). Ninety-two percent of the respondents were men, and 57% were clinicians with more than 20 years of experience. Their specialties were general medicine (29%), rheumatology (27%), orthopedics (31%), and rehabilitation (12%). Sixty-one (39%) stated that they usually presented multiple treatment options to their patients and selected a decision for them, 42 (27%) shared the decision making with their patients, 34 (22%) let their patients choose the treatment, and 20 (13%) made the treatment decision for the patients. Physicians using the shared decision making (SDM) style desired for their patients to have supportive family and friends, to discuss with nurses, and to follow the doctors' directions more strongly compared with physicians using the other styles. There were no significant differences in sex, duration of clinical experience, major place of clinical work, and number of patients per month by the styles. More number of rheumatologists and physicians with specialist qualifications stated that they practiced SDM. To enhance patient participation, physicians need to recognize the importance of discussing treatment options with patients in addition to giving them information. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 17% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 12 | 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 29 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,064
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,374
of 399,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#18
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 399,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.