↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Drug adherence to biologic DMARDS with a special emphasis on the benefits of subcutaneous abatacept

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Drug adherence to biologic DMARDS with a special emphasis on the benefits of subcutaneous abatacept
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, August 2012
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s23786
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anshuman P Malaviya, Andrew JK Östör

Abstract

Major advances in drug development have led to the introduction of biologic disease- modifying drugs for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, which has resulted in unprecedented improvement in outcomes for many patients. These agents have been found to be effective in reducing clinical signs and symptoms, improving radiological damage, quality of life, and functionality, and have also been found to have an acceptable safety profile. Despite this, drug adherence is unknown, which has huge health care and health-economic implications. Local and national guidelines exist for the use of biologics; however, its varied use is widespread. Although this may in part reflect differences in prescribing behavior, patient preference plays a key role. In this review we will explore the factors that contribute to patient preference for, and adherence to, biologic therapy for rheumatoid arthritis with emphasis on the subcutaneous preparation of abatacept, a T-cell costimulatory molecule blocker. Overall, subcutaneous administration is preferred by patients and this may well improve drug adherence.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 56 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 22%
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 6 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 50%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 8 14%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 August 2012.
All research outputs
#20,972,772
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,439
of 1,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,878
of 179,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 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 1,770 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 179,852 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 15 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.