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 preferences for dry powder inhaler attributes in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in France: a discrete choice experiment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pulmonary Medicine, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12890-017-0439-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalia Hawken, Saku Torvinen, Mohamed-Elmoctar Neine, Ikbel Amri, Mondher Toumi, Samuel Aballéa, Adam Plich, Nicolas Roche |
| Abstract |
Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are often used in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) therapies. Using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology, this study conducted in France was designed to assess patients' preferences for different attributes of DPIs. Attributes of DPIs were defined based on a literature review, patient focus group discussions and interviews with healthcare professionals (qualitative phase of the study). An online survey was then conducted among French patients with asthma or COPD to elicit patient preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for these attributes using the DCE methodology (quantitative phase). A fractional factorial design including three blocks of 12 choice sets was created. Each choice set comprised three alternatives: two fictitious inhalers and the patient's current inhaler. Marginal utilities were estimated using a ranked ordered logit model. Interactions between attributes and disease (asthma or COPD) were tested. Six DPI attributes were defined based on the qualitative phase: ease of use/fool-proof priming; accurate and easy-to-read dose counter; dose confirmation; hygiene of the mouthpiece; flexibility of the device handling; ability to use the inhaler with breathing difficulties. Overall, 201 patients with asthma and 93 with COPD were included in the online survey. Patients with asthma placed most value on an inhaler that requires one step for dose preparation (WTP €4.83 [95% CI: €3.77-€5.90], relative to an inhaler requiring four steps) and one that could be used during episodes of breathing difficulties (WTP €4.49 [95% CI: €2.95-€6.02]). Patients with COPD placed most value on an inhaler that could be used during episodes of breathing difficulties (WTP €7.70 [95% CI: €5.65-€9.76]) and on the accuracy of the dose counter (WTP €5.87 [95% CI: €3.98-€ 7.77]). This study suggests that asthma and COPD patients would be willing to change their inhaler if they were offered the option of a new inhaler with improved characteristics and they place a high value on an inhaler with ease of use during breathing difficulty episodes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 17% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 27 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 28% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 31 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 22 January 2021.
All research outputs
#6,072,795
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#420
of 1,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,870
of 313,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pulmonary Medicine
#9
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,932 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. 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 313,072 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 74% of its contemporaries.