↓ Skip to main content

Effects of publicly funded and quality of life on attendance rate among methadone maintenance treatment patients in Taiwan: an 18-month follow-up study

Overview of attention for article published in Harm Reduction Journal, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Effects of publicly funded and quality of life on attendance rate among methadone maintenance treatment patients in Taiwan: an 18-month follow-up study
Published in
Harm Reduction Journal, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12954-015-0076-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kun-Chia Chang, Chung-Ying Lin

Abstract

Methadone maintenance treatment programs (MMTPs) are important public health intervention to control the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and the drug use problems. For expanding treatment coverage, publicly funded programs may be necessary for heroin users with low socio-economic status. We evaluated the difference of demographics, clinical features, and quality of life (QoL) of heroin users enrolled in publicly funded and self-paid MMTP and explored determinants influencing their attendance rate, respectively, for these two groups. A total of 234 heroin users enrolled in MMTP (129 in publicly funded and 105 in self-paid) between 2006 and 2008 self-reported the Taiwan version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument, Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF) at baseline. Data regarding demographic and clinical features were collected during baseline interview. Methadone per 3-month attendance rates up to 18 months were conducted for each participant beginning from the index date. Self-paid group had a better QoL but lower treatment adherence than did the publicly funded group. Male and living alone were positive predictors on attendance rate for publicly funded group, and age of first heroin use and hepatitis C virus (HCV) seropositive were negative predictors. However, predictors on attendance rate for self-paid group were different from publicly funded group: HCV seropositive was a positive predictor and social QoL was a negative predictor. Findings of this study should be concerned with modifying original funding eligibility. Additional measures to explore what could impede treatment adherence are needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Other 5 8%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 17 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 21%
Psychology 8 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 24 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,348,897
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Harm Reduction Journal
#816
of 920 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,094
of 280,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Harm Reduction Journal
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 920 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.9. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 280,050 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.