↓ Skip to main content

Opportunities for involving men and families in chronic disease management: a qualitative study from Chiapas, Mexico

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 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
Opportunities for involving men and families in chronic disease management: a qualitative study from Chiapas, Mexico
Published in
BMC Public Health, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2361-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meredith P. Fort, Maricruz Castro, Liz Peña, Sergio Hernán López Hernández, Gabriel Arreola Camacho, Manuel Ramírez-Zea, Homero Martínez

Abstract

A healthy lifestyle intervention was implemented in primary care health centers in urban parts of Tuxtla Gutiérrez, Chiapas, Mexico with an aim of reducing cardiovascular disease risk for patients with type 2 diabetes and/or hypertension. During implementation, research questions emerged. Considerably fewer men participated in the intervention than women, and an opportunity was identified to increase the reach of activities aimed at improving disease self-management through strategies involving family members. A qualitative study was conducted to identify strategies to involve men and engage family members in disease management and risk reduction. Nine men with hypertension and/or type 2 diabetes with limited to no participation in disease self-management and health promotion activities, six families in which at least one family member had a diagnosis of one or both conditions, and nine health care providers from four different government health centers were recruited for the study. Participants took part in semi-structured interviews. During interviews with families, genograms and eco-maps were used to diagram family composition and structure, and capture the nature of patients' relationships to the extended family and community resources. Transcripts were coded and a general inductive analytic approach was used to identify themes related to men's limited participation in health promotion activities, family support and barriers to disease management, and health care providers' recommendations. Participants reported barriers to men's participation in chronic disease management and healthy lifestyle education activities that can be grouped into two categories: internal and external factors. Internal factors are those for which they are able to make the decision on their own and external factors are those that are not related solely to their decision to take part or not. Four primary aspects were identified related to families' relationships with disease: different roles within the family, types of support provided to patients, the opportunity to prevent disease among family members without a diagnosis, and - in some cases - lack of family support or stress-induced by other family members. There was an overlap in recommended strategies for engaging men and family members in chronic disease management activities. There is an opportunity to increase the reach of interventions aimed at improving disease self-management by engaging men and family members. The proposed strategies presented by patients, family members, and providers have implications for health education and service provision at primary care health centers and for future research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 182 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 16%
Student > Master 28 15%
Researcher 21 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 30 16%
Unknown 45 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 45 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 42 23%
Social Sciences 17 9%
Psychology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 14 8%
Unknown 53 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,473,755
of 22,994,508 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,433
of 14,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,287
of 277,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#196
of 267 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,994,508 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,980 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 277,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 267 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.