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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Hydroxyurea therapy for children with sickle cell disease: describing how caregivers make this decision
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-015-1344-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susan Creary, Susan Zickmund, Diana Ross, Lakshmanan Krishnamurti, Debra L. Bogen |
| Abstract |
Hydroxyurea (HU) is underutilized in children with sickle cell disease (SCD) because caregivers frequently decline HU when it is offered. This study explores what impacts this decision. Caregivers of children with clinically severe SCD whose children were offered HU previously were interviewed. We used a qualitative analytical approach to analyze their telephone interview transcripts. Caregivers who chose HU (n = 9) reported their children had severe SCD, sought detailed information about HU, and accepted HU as a preventative therapy. In contrast, caregivers who did not choose HU (n = 10) did not perceive their children as having severe SCD and did not question their child's provider about HU. This study identifies specific areas that providers should address to when they discuss HU with families so that they can make informed decisions. Our study also uncovered factors that are important to consider when designing future interventions to improve hydroxyurea acceptance and when developing decision-aid tools to assist caregivers of children with SCD who are considering disease modifying therapies. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Nigeria | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 48 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 18% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 10% |
| Psychology | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
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 30 August 2015.
All research outputs
#20,290,425
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,558
of 4,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,694
of 267,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#115
of 147 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 267,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 147 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.