↓ Skip to main content

Renal transplant patients’ preference for the supply and delivery of immunosuppressants in Wales: a discrete choice experiment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Renal transplant patients’ preference for the supply and delivery of immunosuppressants in Wales: a discrete choice experiment
Published in
BMC Nephrology, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12882-017-0720-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anke Hagemi, Catrin Plumpton, Dyfrig A. Hughes

Abstract

Prescribing policy recommendations aimed at moving immunosuppressant prescribing for renal transplant patients from primary to secondary care may result in benefits of increased safety and reduced cost. However, there is little evidence of patients' preferences for receiving their immunosuppressant therapy from hospitals compared to community dispensing. The aim of this study was to elicit patient preferences for different service configurations focusing in particular on home delivery versus collection of medication from hospital. A discrete choice experiment was administered to 265 renal transplant patients in North Wales. Respondents were presented 18 pairwise choices, labelled as either home delivery or hospital collection, and described by the attributes: frequency of supply, waiting time (for delivery or collection) and method of ordering (provider contact, patient contact via phone, patient contact electronically). Data were analysed using a random-effects logit model and marginal rates of substitution calculated based on the waiting time attribute. A response rate of 63% was achieved, with 5332 usable observations from 150 respondents. Method of delivery (β coefficient 1.21; 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.38), frequency of supply (0.05; 0.03 to 0.08) waiting time (-0.00, -0.00 to -0.00), provider contact (desirable) (0.20; 0.12 to 0.27), patient contact by telephone (desirable) (0.09; 0.01 to 0.17) and patient contact electronically (undesirable) (-0.292; -0.37 to -0.21) were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Results indicate that patients are willing to increase waiting time by nearly 10 h to have a home delivery service. Patients indicate a clear preference for a home delivery service. They prefer providers to make contact when new immunosuppressant supplies are required and show preference against ordering medication electronically. A policy for secondary care prescribing and hospital collection of medicines does not align with this preference.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 18 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 6%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 21 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 02 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,008,244
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#769
of 2,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,316
of 322,939 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#10
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,497 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 322,939 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 65% of its contemporaries.