↓ Skip to main content

The diagnostic pathway of Parkinson’s disease: a cross-sectional survey study of factors influencing patient dissatisfaction

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
The diagnostic pathway of Parkinson’s disease: a cross-sectional survey study of factors influencing patient dissatisfaction
Published in
BMC Family Practice, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12875-017-0652-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annette O. A. Plouvier, Tim C. Olde Hartman, Olga A. de Bont, Sjoerd Maandag, Bastiaan R. Bloem, Chris van Weel, Antoine L. M. Lagro-Janssen

Abstract

The diagnostic pathway of Parkinson's disease (PD) is often complicated. Experiences during this pathway can affect patients' satisfaction and their confidence and trust in healthcare providers. Although healthcare providers cannot influence the impact of the diagnosis, they can influence how patients experience the pathway. This study, therefore, aims to provide insight into PD patients' dissatisfaction with the diagnostic pathway and to describe the factors that influence it. We carried out a cross-sectional survey study among 902 patient members of the Dutch Parkinson's Disease Association, who were each asked to write an essay about their diagnostic pathway. A coding format was developed to examine the content of these essays. Inter-observer agreement on coding patient dissatisfaction was calculated using Cohen's kappa. The χ(2) test and a multivariable logistic regression analysis were performed to assess the relation between dissatisfaction and sex, level of education, duration of the pathway, communication with the general practitioner (GP) and the neurologist, the number of healthcare providers involved, whether or not a second opinion had taken place (including the person who initiated it) and diagnostic delay (taking into consideration who caused the delay according to the patient). A subgroup analysis was performed to gain insight into sex-related differences. Of all patients, 16.4% explicitly described they were dissatisfied with the diagnostic pathway, whereas 4.8% were very satisfied. The inter-observer agreement on coding dissatisfaction was κ = 0.82. The chance of dissatisfaction increased with a lower level of education, the involvement of more than one additional healthcare provider, a second opinion initiated by the patient and delay caused by a healthcare provider. When only the GP and the neurologist were involved, women were more likely to be dissatisfied than men. PD patients' dissatisfaction with the diagnostic pathway is related to a lower level of education, a second opinion initiated by the patient and experienced diagnostic delay. GPs can positively influence patients' experiences if they are aware of these risk factors for dissatisfaction and pay extra attention to communication and shared decision making. This will contribute to a trusting therapeutic relationship that is indispensable with progression of the disease.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 3 5%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 18 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 27%
Psychology 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Engineering 4 7%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 21 35%

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 01 September 2017.
All research outputs
#7,277,100
of 11,689,928 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#824
of 1,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,210
of 263,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,689,928 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 263,738 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.