↓ Skip to main content

Development of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using a theory-based method

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
146 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Development of an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care using a theory-based method
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1907-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cathal A. Cadogan, Cristín Ryan, Jill J. Francis, Gerard J. Gormley, Peter Passmore, Ngaire Kerse, Carmel M. Hughes

Abstract

It is advocated that interventions to improve clinical practice should be developed using a systematic approach and intervention development methods should be reported. However, previous interventions aimed at ensuring that older people receive appropriate polypharmacy have lacked details on their development. This study formed part of a multiphase research project which aimed to develop an intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people in primary care. The target behaviours for the intervention were prescribing and dispensing of appropriate polypharmacy to older patients by general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists. Intervention development followed a systematic approach, including previous mapping of behaviour change techniques (BCTs) to key domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework that were perceived by GPs and pharmacists to influence the target behaviours. Draft interventions were developed to operationalise selected BCTs through team discussion. Selection of an intervention for feasibility testing was guided by a subset of the APEASE (Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness/cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety, Equity) criteria. Three draft interventions comprising selected BCTs were developed, targeting patients, pharmacists and GPs, respectively. Following assessment of each intervention using a subset of the APEASE criteria (affordability, practicability, acceptability), the GP-targeted intervention was selected for feasibility testing. This intervention will involve a demonstration of the behaviour and will be delivered as an online video. The video demonstrating how GPs can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy during a typical consultation with an older patient will also demonstrate salience of consequences (feedback emphasising the positive outcomes of performing the behaviour). Action plans and prompts/cues will be used as complementary intervention components. The intervention is designed to facilitate the prescribing of appropriate polypharmacy in routine practice. A GP-targeted intervention to improve appropriate polypharmacy in older people has been developed using a systematic approach. Intervention content has been specified using an established taxonomy of BCTs and selected to maximise feasibility. The results of a future feasibility study will help to determine if the theory-based intervention requires further refinement before progressing to a larger scale randomised evaluation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 145 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Master 22 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 8%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 44 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 14%
Psychology 18 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 15 10%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 51 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,872,718
of 23,866,543 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,890
of 7,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,387
of 272,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#55
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,866,543 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 272,567 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.