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 |
Using read codes to identify patients with irritable bowel syndrome in general practice: a database study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-14-183 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elaine F Harkness, Laura Grant, Sarah J O’Brien, Carolyn A Chew-Graham, David G Thompson |
| Abstract |
Estimates of the prevalence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) vary widely, and a large proportion of patients report having consulted their general practitioner (GP). In patients with new onset gastrointestinal symptoms in primary care it might be possible to predict those at risk of persistent symptoms. However, one of the difficulties is identifying patients within primary care. GPs use a variety of Read Codes to describe patients presenting with IBS. Furthermore, in a qualitative study, exploring GPs' attitudes and approaches to defining patients with IBS, GPs appeared reluctant to add the IBS Read Code to the patient record until more serious conditions were ruled out. Consequently, symptom codes such as 'abdominal pain', 'diarrhoea' or 'constipation' are used. The aim of the current study was to investigate the prevalence of recorded consultations for IBS and to explore the symptom profile of patients with IBS using data from the Salford Integrated Record (SIR). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 21% |
| Researcher | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 39% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Psychology | 4 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
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 07 December 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,714
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,392
of 320,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#39
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 320,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.