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 |
Patient and provider acceptance of telecoaching in type 2 diabetes: a mixed-method study embedded in a randomised clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12911-016-0383-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
I. Odnoletkova, H. Buysse, F. Nobels, G. Goderis, B. Aertgeerts, L. Annemans, D. Ramaekers |
| Abstract |
Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment of type 2 diabetes, suboptimal metabolic control persists. Patient education in diabetes has been proved to enhance self-efficacy and guideline-driven treatment, however many people with type 2 diabetes do not have access to or do not participate in self-management support programmes. Tele-education and telecoaching have the potential to improve accessibility and efficiency of care, but there is a slow uptake in Europe. Patient and provider acceptance in a local context is an important pre-condition for implementation. The aim of the study was to explore the perceptions of patients, nurses and general practitioners (GPs) regarding telecoaching in type 2 diabetes. Mixed-method study embedded in a clinical trial, in which a nurse-led target-driven telecoaching programme consisting of 5 monthly telephone sessions of +/- 30 min was offered to 287 people with type 2 diabetes in Belgian primary care. Intervention attendance and satisfaction about the programme were analysed along with qualitative data obtained during post-trial semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of patients, general practitioners (GPs) and nurses. The perceptions of patients and care providers about the intervention were coded and the themes interpreted as barriers or facilitators for adoption. Of 252 patients available for a follow-up analysis, 97.5 % reported being satisfied. Interviews were held with 16 patients, 17 general practitioners (GPs) and all nurses involved (n = 6). Themes associated with adoption facilitation were: 1) improved diabetes control; 2) need for more tailored patient education programmes offered from the moment of diagnosis; 3) comfort and flexibility; 4) evidence-based nature of the programme; 5) established cooperation between GPs and diabetes educators; and 6) efficiency gains. Most potential barriers were derived from the provider views: 1) poor patient motivation and suboptimal compliance with "faceless" advice; 2) GPs' reluctance in the area of patient referral and information sharing; 3) lack of legal, organisational and financial framework for telecare. Nurse-led telecoaching of people with type 2 diabetes was well-accepted by patients and providers, with providers being in general more critical in their reflections. With increasing patient demand for mobile and remote services in healthcare, the findings of this study should support professionals involved in healthcare policy and innovation. NCT01612520 , registered prior to recruitment on 4th June 2012. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 50% |
| Italy | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 285 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 285 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 44 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 13% |
| Researcher | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 8% |
| Other | 36 | 13% |
| Unknown | 98 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 72 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 19 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 2% |
| Other | 37 | 13% |
| Unknown | 105 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 February 2017.
All research outputs
#14,875,637
of 22,908,162 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#1,230
of 1,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,251
of 313,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
#19
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,908,162 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,997 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 313,011 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.