↓ Skip to main content

Enablers and barriers to secondary prophylaxis for rheumatic fever among Māori aged 14–21 in New Zealand: a framework method study

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Enablers and barriers to secondary prophylaxis for rheumatic fever among Māori aged 14–21 in New Zealand: a framework method study
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0700-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hilary Barker, John G. Oetzel, Nina Scott, Michelle Morley, Polly E. Atatoa Carr, Keri Bolton Oetzel

Abstract

Acute rheumatic fever (ARF) rates have declined to near zero in nearly all developed countries. However, in New Zealand rates have not declined since the 1980s. Further, ARF diagnoses in New Zealand are inequitably distributed--occurring almost exclusively in Māori (the indigenous population) and Pacific children--with very low rates in the majority New Zealand European population. With ARF diagnosis, secondary prophylaxis is key to prevent recurrence. The purpose of this study was to identify the perceived enablers and barriers to secondary recurrence prophylaxis following ARF for Māori patients aged 14-21. This study took a systems approach, was informed by patient voice and used a framework method to explore potential barriers and enablers to ongoing adherence with monthly antibiotic injections for secondary prophylaxis. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 19 Māori ARF patients receiving recurrence prophylaxis in the Waikato District Health Board region. Participants included those fully adherent to treatment, those with intermittent adherence or those who had been "lost to follow-up." Barriers and enablers were presented around three factors: system (including access/resources), relational and individual. Access and resources included district nurses coming to patients as an enabler and lack of income and time off work as barriers. Relational characteristics included support from family and friends as enablers and district nurse communication as predominantly a positive although not enabling factor. Individual characteristics included understanding, personal responsibility and fear/pain of injections. This detailed exploration of barriers and enablers for ongoing secondary prophylaxis provides important new information for the prevention of recurrent ARF. Among other considerations, a national register, innovative engagement with youth and their families and a comprehensive pain management programme are likely to improve adherence to ongoing secondary prophylaxis and reduce the burden of RHD for New Zealand individuals, families and health system.

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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 16%
Student > Master 16 15%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 36 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 18%
Psychology 6 6%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 38 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 July 2018.
All research outputs
#13,058,343
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1,287
of 1,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,076
of 431,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#24
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 431,641 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.