↓ Skip to main content

What primary health care services should residents of rural and remote Australia be able to access? A systematic review of “core” primary health care services

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
What primary health care services should residents of rural and remote Australia be able to access? A systematic review of “core” primary health care services
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-178
Pubmed ID
Authors

Timothy A Carey, John Wakerman, John S Humphreys, Penny Buykx, Melissa Lindeman

Abstract

There are significant health status inequalities in Australia between those people living in rural and remote locations and people living in metropolitan centres. Since almost ninety percent of the population use some form of primary health care service annually, a logical initial step in reducing the disparity in health status is to improve access to health care by specifying those primary health care services that should be considered as "core" and therefore readily available to all Australians regardless of where they live. A systematic review was undertaken to define these "core" services.Using the question "What primary health care services should residents of rural and remote Australia be able to access?", the objective of this paper is to delineate those primary health care core services that should be readily available to all regardless of geography.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 3 2%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 118 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 16%
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Postgraduate 13 10%
Other 24 19%
Unknown 19 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Social Sciences 13 10%
Psychology 9 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 24 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 01 January 2021.
All research outputs
#4,086,348
of 25,292,378 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,812
of 8,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,593
of 202,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#24
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,292,378 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,592 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 202,077 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.