| Title |
Secondary analysis of electronically monitored medication adherence data for a cohort of hypertensive African-Americans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, March 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s30582 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
George J Knafl, Antoinette Schoenthaler, Gbenga Ogedegbe |
| Abstract |
Electronic monitoring devices (EMDs) are regarded as the "gold standard" for assessing medication adherence in research. Although EMD data provide rich longitudinal information, they are typically not used to their maximum potential. Instead, EMD data are usually combined into summary measures, which lack sufficient detail for describing complex medication-taking patterns. This paper uses recently developed methods for analyzing EMD data that capitalize more fully on their richness. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 33% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 4 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 49% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 10% |
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 22 March 2012.
All research outputs
#20,823,121
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,400
of 1,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,340
of 168,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 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 168,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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.