↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of a patient-initiated review system in rheumatoid arthritis: an implementation trial protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 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
Evaluation of a patient-initiated review system in rheumatoid arthritis: an implementation trial protocol
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-13-120
Pubmed ID
Authors

Priyamvada Paudyal, Mark Perry, Sue Child, Christian A Gericke

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory condition that affects the joints causing unpredictable episodes of pain, stiffness and disability. People with rheumatoid arthritis usually require lifelong specialist follow-up but frequently have periods when their disease can be managed through self-care or that provided by their general practitioner. Compared to the traditional clinician-driven care in rheumatoid arthritis, patient-initiated care has proven to be more beneficial in terms of reducing unnecessary medical reviews, providing greater satisfaction to patients and staffs and maintaining the patient's physical and psychological status. We aim to evaluate the implementation of a patient-initiated review system in a routine secondary care rheumatology service in a public hospital in England, where patients get the opportunity to self-manage their disease by requesting specialist reviews at times of need instead of clinician-scheduled appointments.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Colombia 1 1%
Unknown 92 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 24%
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 18 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 14%
Psychology 12 13%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 23 24%

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 13 July 2012.
All research outputs
#7,383,529
of 12,373,620 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,396
of 2,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,580
of 120,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#13
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,620 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 120,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.