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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Factors affecting the delivery of community pharmacist-led medication reviews: evidence from the MedsCheck annual service in Ontario
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-016-1888-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Petros Pechlivanoglou, Lusine Abrahamyan, Linda MacKeigan, Giulia P. Consiglio, Lisa Dolovich, Ping Li, Suzanne M. Cadarette, Valeria E. Rac, Jonghyun Shin, Murray Krahn |
| Abstract |
Medication reviews have become part of pharmacy practice across developed countries. This study aimed to identify factors affecting the likelihood of eligible Ontario seniors receiving a pharmacy-led medication review called MedsCheck annual (MCA). We designed a cohort study using a random sample of pharmacy claims for MCA-eligible Ontario seniors using linked administrative data from April 2012 to March 2013. Guided by a conceptual framework, we constructed a generalized-estimating-equations model to estimate the effect of patient, pharmacy and community factors on the likelihood of receiving MCA. Of the 2,878,958 eligible claim-dates, 65,605 included an MCA. Compared to eligible individuals who did not receive an MCA, recipients were more likely to have a prior MCA (OR = 3.03), receive a new medication on the claim-date (OR = 1.78), be hypertensive (OR = 1.18) or have a recent hospitalization (OR = 1.07). MCA recipients had fewer medications (e.g., OR = 0.44 for ≥12 medications versus 0-4 medications), and were less likely to receive an MCA in a rural (OR = 0.74) or high-volume pharmacy (OR = 0.65). The most important determinant of receiving an MCA was having had a prior MCA. Overall, MCA recipients were healthier, younger, urban-dwelling, and taking fewer medications than non-recipients. Policies regarding current and future medication review programs may need to evolve to ensure that those at greatest need receive timely and comprehensive medication reviews. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 13% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 24 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 17 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 27 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 February 2024.
All research outputs
#5,449,088
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,656
of 8,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,964
of 415,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#30
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 415,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.