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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Validation of the German version of two scales (RIS, RCS-HCP) for measuring regret associated with providing healthcare
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12955-017-0630-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Silvia C. Richner, Stéphane Cullati, Boris Cheval, Ralph E. Schmidt, Pierre Chopard, Christoph A. Meier, Delphine S. Courvoisier |
| Abstract |
The regret intensity scale (RIS) and the regret coping scale for healthcare professionals (RCS-HCP) working in hospitals assess the experience of care-related regrets and how healthcare professional deal with these negative events. The aim of this study was to validate a German version of the RIS and the RCS-HCP. The RIS and RCS-HCP in German were first translated into German (forward- and backward translations) and then pretested with 16 German-speaking healthcare professionals. Finally, two surveys (test and 1-month retest) administered the scales to a large sample of healthcare professionals from two different hospitals. Of the 2142 eligible healthcare professionals, 494 (23.1%) individuals (108 physicians) completed the cross-sectional web based survey and 244 completed the retest questionnaire. Participants (n = 165, 33.4% of the total sample) who reported not having experienced a regret in the last 5 years, had significantly more days of sick leave during the last 6 months. These participants were excluded from the subsequent analyses. The structure of the scales was similar to the French version with a single dimension for the regret intensity scale (Cronbach's alpha: 0.88) and three types of coping strategies for the regret coping scale (alphas: 0.69 for problem-focused strategies, 0.67 for adaptive strategies and 0.86 for the maladaptive strategies). Construct validity was good and reproduced the findings of the French study, namely that higher regret intensity was associated with situations that entailed more consequences for the patients. Furthermore, higher regret intensity and more frequent use of maladaptive strategies were associated with more sleep difficulties and less work satisfaction. The German RIS and RCS-HCP scales were found valid for measuring regret intensity and regret coping in a population of healthcare professionals working in a hospital. Reporting no regret, which corresponds to the coping strategy of suppression, seems to be a maladaptive strategy because it was associated with more frequent sick day leaves. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 9 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 15 | 29% |
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 24 March 2017.
All research outputs
#17,884,576
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,509
of 2,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,138
of 309,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#38
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 309,205 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.