↓ Skip to main content

Exploring views on what is important for patient-centred care in end-stage renal disease using Q methodology

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nephrology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Exploring views on what is important for patient-centred care in end-stage renal disease using Q methodology
Published in
BMC Nephrology, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12882-015-0071-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jane M. Cramm, Laszlo Leensvaart, Mathilde Berghout, Job van Exel

Abstract

This study aimed to explore views on what is considered important for Patient-Centred Care (PCC) among patients and the healthcare professionals treating them in a haemodialysis department. Interviews were conducted among 14 patients with end-stage renal disease receiving dialysis and 12 healthcare professionals (i.e. 2 doctors, 4 staff members, and 6 nurses) working at a haemodialysis department. Participants were asked to rank-order 35 statements representing eight dimensions of PCC previously discussed in the literature. Views on PCC, and communalities and differences between them, were explored using by-person factor analysis. Four views on what is important for PCC in end-stage renal disease were identified. In viewpoint 1, listening to patients and taking account of their preferences in treatment decisions is considered central to PCC. In viewpoint 2, providing comprehensible information and education to patients so that they can take charge of their own care is considered important. In viewpoint 3, several aspects related to the atmosphere at the department were put forward as important for PCC. In viewpoint 4, having a professional or acquaintance that acts as care coordinator, making treatment decisions with or for them, was considered particularly beneficial. All views agreed about the relative importance of certain PCC dimensions; the patient preferences and information and education dimensions were generally considered most important, while the family and friends and the access to care dimensions were considered least important. The four views on PCC among patients in a haemodialysis department and the professionals treating them suggest that there is no one size fits all strategy for providing PCC to patients with end-stage renal disease. Some patients may benefit from educational interventions to improve their self-management skills and place them in charge of their own care, whereas other patients may benefit more from the availability of a care coordinator to make decisions for them, or with them. Furthermore, our results suggest that not all eight dimensions of PCC need to be given equal consideration in the care for patients with end-stage renal disease in order to improve patient outcomes.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
Unknown 89 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 29 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 22%
Social Sciences 6 7%
Psychology 6 7%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 30 33%
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 29 May 2015.
All research outputs
#7,148,515
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nephrology
#778
of 2,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,645
of 266,679 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nephrology
#12
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,465 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 266,679 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 71% of its contemporaries.