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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Rheumatoid arthritis patient perceptions on the value of predictive testing for treatments: a qualitative study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12891-016-1319-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kanta Kumar, Sarah Peters, Anne Barton, on behalf of MATURA |
| Abstract |
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a long term condition that requires early treatment to control symptoms and improve long-term outcomes. Lack of response to RA treatments is not only a waste of healthcare resources, but also causes disability and distress to patients. Identifying biomarkers predictive of treatment response offers an opportunity to improve clinical decisions about which treatment to recommend in patients and could ultimately lead to better patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore the understanding of and factors affecting Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) patients' decisions around predictive treatment testing. A qualitative study was conducted with a purposive sample of 16 patients with RA from three major UK cities. Four focus groups explored patient perceptions of the use of biomarker tests to predict response to treatments. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis by three researchers. Data were organised within three interlinking themes: [1] Perceptions of predictive tests and patient preference of tests; [2] Utility of the test to manage expectations; [3] The influence of the disease duration on take up of predictive testing. During consultations for predictive testing, patients felt they would need, first, careful explanations detailing the consequences of untreated RA and delayed treatment response and, second, support to balance the risks of tests, which might be invasive and/or only moderately accurate, with the potential benefits of better management of symptoms. This study provides important insights into predictive testing. Besides supporting clinical decision making, the development of predictive testing in RA is largely supported by patients. Developing strategies which communicate risk information about predictive testing effectively while reducing the psychological burden associated with this information will be essential to maximise uptake. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 11 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 18% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 5 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 30% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 30 April 2019.
All research outputs
#4,210,168
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#839
of 4,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,336
of 313,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#15
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 313,385 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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 73% of its contemporaries.