↓ Skip to main content

Health-care users, key community informants and primary health care workers’ views on health, health promotion, health assets and deficits: qualitative study in seven Spanish regions

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, June 2017
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 (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 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
Health-care users, key community informants and primary health care workers’ views on health, health promotion, health assets and deficits: qualitative study in seven Spanish regions
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12939-017-0590-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariona Pons-Vigués, Anna Berenguera, Núria Coma-Auli, Haizea Pombo-Ramos, Sebastià March, Angela Asensio-Martínez, Patricia Moreno-Peral, Sara Mora-Simón, Maria Martínez-Andrés, Enriqueta Pujol-Ribera

Abstract

Although some articles have analysed the definitions of health and health promotion from the perspective of health-care users and health care professionals, no published studies include the simultaneous participation of health-care users, primary health care professionals and key community informants. Understanding the perception of health and health promotion amongst these different stakeholders is crucial for the design and implementation of successful, equitable and sustainable measures that improve the health and wellbeing of populations. Furthermore, the identification of different health assets and deficits by the different informants will generate new evidence to promote healthy behaviours, improve community health and wellbeing and reduce preventable inequalities. The objective of this study is to explore the concept of health and health promotion and to compare health assets and deficits as identified by health-care users, key community informants and primary health care workers with the ultimate purpose to collect the necessary data for the design and implementation of a successful health promotion intervention. A descriptive-interpretive qualitative research was conducted with 276 participants from 14 primary care centres of 7 Spanish regions. Theoretical sampling was used for selection. We organized 11 discussion groups and 2 triangular groups with health-care users; 30 semi-structured interviews with key community informants; and 14 discussion groups with primary health care workers. A thematic content analysis was carried out. Health-care users and key community informants agree that health is a complex, broad, multifactorial concept that encompasses several interrelated dimensions (physical, psychological-emotional, social, occupational, intellectual, spiritual and environmental). The three participants' profiles consider health promotion indispensable despite defining it as complex and vague. In fact, most health-care users admit to having implemented some change to promote their health. The most powerful motivators to change lifestyles are having a disease, fear of becoming ill and taking care of oneself to maintain health. Health-care users believe that the main difficulties are associated with the physical, social, working and family environment, as well as lack of determination and motivation. They also highlight the need for more information. In relation to the assets and deficits of the neighbourhood, each group identifies those closer to their role. Generally, participants showed a holistic and positive concept of health and a more traditional, individual approach to health promotion. We consider therefore crucial to depart from the model of health services that focuses on the individual and the disease toward a socio-ecological health model that substantially increases the participation of health-care users and emphasizes health promotion, wellbeing and community participation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 172 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 40 23%
Student > Bachelor 22 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 11%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 5%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 37 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 30 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 14%
Psychology 14 8%
Social Sciences 12 7%
Unspecified 12 7%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 50 29%
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 26 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,687,000
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#658
of 1,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,542
of 317,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#20
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 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 1,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 317,529 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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 62% of its contemporaries.