↓ Skip to main content

Project HELP: a study protocol to pilot test a shared decision-making tool about treatment options for patients with hepatitis C and chronic kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Pilot and Feasibility Studies, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Project HELP: a study protocol to pilot test a shared decision-making tool about treatment options for patients with hepatitis C and chronic kidney disease
Published in
Pilot and Feasibility Studies, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40814-018-0251-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. C. Politi, N. George, T. Li, K. M. Korenblat, K. J. Fowler, C. Ho, A. Liapakis, D. Roth, J. Yee

Abstract

Recent advances in treatment have given patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) access to safer and more effective medications to treat comorbid hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Given the variety and complexity of treatment options that depend on patients' clinical characteristics and personal preferences, education and decision support are needed to prepare patients better to discuss treatment options with their clinicians. Drawing on International Patient Decision Aids Standards guidelines, literature reviews, and guidance from a diverse expert advisory group of nephrologists, hepatologists, and patients, we will develop and test a HCV and CKD decision support tool. NamedProject HELP(Helping Empower Liver and kidney Patients), this tool will support patients with HCV and CKD during decisions about whether, when, and how to treat each illness. The tool will (1) explain information using plain language and graphics; (2) provide a step-by-step process for thinking about treating HCV and CKD; (3) tailor relevant information to each user by asking about the individual's stage of CKD, stage of fibrosis, prior treatment, and comorbidities; (4) assess user knowledge and values for treatment choices; and (5) help individuals use and consider information appropriate to their values and needs to discuss with a clinician. A pilot study including 70 individuals will evaluate the tool's efficacy, usability, and likelihood of using it in clinical practice. Eligibility criteria will include individuals who understand and read English, who are at least 18 years old, have a diagnosis of HCV (any genotype) and CKD (any stage), and are considering treatment options. This study can identify particular characteristics of individuals or groups that might experience challenges initiating treatment for HCV in the CKD population. This tool could provide a resource to facilitate patient-clinician discussions regarding HCV and CKD treatment options.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Psychology 2 6%
Linguistics 1 3%
Other 8 25%
Unknown 9 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,376,243
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#664
of 1,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,169
of 331,231 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pilot and Feasibility Studies
#29
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 331,231 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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.