↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Challenges to physician–patient communication about medication use: a window into the skeptical patient’s world

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Challenges to physician–patient communication about medication use: a window into the skeptical patient’s world
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, December 2011
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s25971
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanya Bezreh, M Barton Laws, Tatiana Taubin, Dena E Rifkin, Ira B Wilson

Abstract

Patients frequently do not take medicines as prescribed and often do not communicate with their physicians about their medication-taking behavior. The movement for "patient-centered" care has led to relabeling of this problem from "noncompliance" to "nonadherence" and later to a rhetoric of "concordance" and "shared decision making" in which physicians and patients are viewed as partners who ideally come to agreement about appropriate treatment. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of online comments to a New York Times article on low rates of medication adherence. The online discussion provides data about how a highly selected, educated sample of patients thinks about medication use and the doctor-patient relationship. Our analysis revealed patient empowerment and self-reliance, considerable mistrust of medications and medical practice, and frequent noncommunication about medication adherence issues. We discuss how these observations can potentially be understood with reference to Habermas's theory of communicative action, and conclude that physicians can benefit from better understanding the negative ways in which some patients perceive physicians' prescribing practices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 111 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Other 12 10%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 32 28%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 41%
Social Sciences 11 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Psychology 9 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 21 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 18 November 2019.
All research outputs
#1,511,060
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#60
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,569
of 246,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 246,216 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.