↓ Skip to main content

An evidence synthesis of the international knowledge base for new care models to inform and mobilise knowledge for multispecialty community providers (MCPs)

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
An evidence synthesis of the international knowledge base for new care models to inform and mobilise knowledge for multispecialty community providers (MCPs)
Published in
Systematic Reviews, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13643-016-0346-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alison Turner, Abeda Mulla, Andrew Booth, Shiona Aldridge, Sharon Stevens, Fraser Battye, Peter Spilsbury

Abstract

NHS England's Five Year Forward View (NHS England, Five Year Forward View, 2014) formally introduced a strategy for new models of care driven by simultaneous pressures to contain costs, improve care and deliver services closer to home through integrated models. This synthesis focuses on a multispecialty community provider (MCP) model. This new model of care seeks to overcome the limitations in current models of care, often based around single condition-focused pathways, in contrast to patient-focused delivery (Royal College of General Practitioners, The 2022 GP: compendium of evidence, 2012) which offers greater continuity of care in recognition of complex needs and multimorbidity. The synthesis, an innovative combination of best fit framework synthesis and realist synthesis, will develop a "blueprint" which articulates how and why MCP models work, to inform design of future iterations of the MCP model. A systematic search will be conducted to identify research and practice-derived evidence to achieve a balance that captures the historical legacy of MCP models but focuses on contemporary evidence. Sources will include bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, HMIC and Cochrane Library; and grey literature sources. The Best Fit synthesis methodology will be combined with a synthesis following realist principles which are particularly suited to exploring what works, when, for whom and in what circumstances. The aim of this synthesis is to provide decision makers in health and social care with a practical evidence base relating to the multispecialty community provider (MCP) model of care. PROSPERO CRD42016039552 .

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Unknown 76 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 9 12%
Librarian 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 11 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 18%
Social Sciences 12 15%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 11 14%

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 18 November 2016.
All research outputs
#9,136,472
of 15,918,484 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,029
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#128,498
of 271,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#10
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,918,484 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 271,774 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.