↓ Skip to main content

Are patients’ preferences regarding the place of treatment heard and addressed at the point of referral: an exploratory study based on observations of GP-patient consultations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Are patients’ preferences regarding the place of treatment heard and addressed at the point of referral: an exploratory study based on observations of GP-patient consultations
Published in
BMC Family Practice, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2296-14-189
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aafke Victoor, Janneke Noordman, Johan A Sonderkamp, Diana M J Delnoij, Roland D Friele, Sandra van Dulmen, Jany J D J M Rademakers

Abstract

Today, in several north-western European countries, patients are encouraged to choose, actively, a healthcare provider. However, patients often visit the provider that is recommended by their general practitioner (GP). The introduction of patient choice requires GPs to support patients to be involved, actively, in the choice of a healthcare provider. We aim to investigate whether policy on patient choice is reflected in practice, i.e. what the role of the patient is in their choices of healthcare providers at the point of referral and to what extent GPs' and patients' healthcare paths influence the role that patients play in the referral decision.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 30%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Other 3 10%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 43%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 13%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 December 2013.
All research outputs
#3,185,263
of 12,818,855 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#429
of 1,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,414
of 247,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#52
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,818,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 247,794 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.