↓ Skip to main content

Qualitative analysis of patient-centered decision attributes associated with initiating hepatitis C treatment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Gastroenterology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Qualitative analysis of patient-centered decision attributes associated with initiating hepatitis C treatment
Published in
BMC Gastroenterology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12876-015-0356-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica L. Zuchowski, Alison B. Hamilton, Jeffrey M. Pyne, Jack A. Clark, Aanand D. Naik, Donna L. Smith, Fasiha Kanwal

Abstract

In this era of a constantly changing landscape of antiviral treatment options for chronic viral hepatitis C (CHC), shared clinical decision-making addresses the need to engage patients in complex treatment decisions. However, little is known about the decision attributes that CHC patients consider when making treatment decisions. We identify key patient-centered decision attributes, and explore relationships among these attributes, to help inform the development of a future CHC shared decision-making aid. Semi-structured qualitative interviews with CHC patients at four Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals, in three comparison groups: contemplating CHC treatment at the time of data collection (Group 1), recently declined CHC treatment (Group 2), or recently started CHC treatment (Group 3). Participant descriptions of decision attributes were analyzed for the entire sample as well as by patient group and by gender. Twenty-nine Veteran patients participated (21 males, eight females): 12 were contemplating treatment, nine had recently declined treatment, and eight had recently started treatment. Patients on average described eight (range 5-13) decision attributes. The attributes most frequently reported overall were: physical side effects (83 %); treatment efficacy (79 %), new treatment drugs in development (55 %); psychological side effects (55 %); and condition of the liver (52 %), with some variation based on group and gender. Personal life circumstance attributes (such as availability of family support and the burden of financial responsibilities) influencing treatment decisions were also noted by all participants. Multiple decision attributes were interrelated in highly complex ways. Participants considered numerous attributes in their CHC treatment decisions. A better understanding of these attributes that influence patient decision-making is crucial in order to inform patient-centered clinical approaches to care (such as shared decision-making augmented with relevant decision-making aids) that respond to patients' needs, preferences, and circumstances.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 21%
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 5 6%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 18 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Psychology 9 11%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 27 32%
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 10 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,754,594
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from BMC Gastroenterology
#663
of 1,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,428
of 274,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Gastroenterology
#11
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,745 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 274,923 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 67% of its contemporaries.