↓ Skip to main content

The development of a guideline implementability tool (GUIDE-IT): a qualitative study of family physician perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
The development of a guideline implementability tool (GUIDE-IT): a qualitative study of family physician perspectives
Published in
BMC Family Practice, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2296-15-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monika Kastner, Elizabeth Estey, Leigh Hayden, Ananda Chatterjee, Agnes Grudniewicz, Ian D Graham, Onil Bhattacharyya

Abstract

The potential of clinical practice guidelines has not been realized due to inconsistent adoption in clinical practice. Optimising intrinsic characteristics of guidelines (e.g., its wording and format) that are associated with uptake (as perceived by their end users) may have potential. Using findings from a realist review on guideline uptake and consultation with experts in guideline development, we designed a conceptual version of a future tool called Guideline Implementability Tool (GUIDE-IT). The tool will aim to involve family physicians in the guideline development process by providing a process to assess draft guideline recommendations. This feedback will then be given back to developers to consider when finalizing the recommendations. As guideline characteristics are best assessed by end-users, the objectives of the current study were to explore how family physicians perceive guideline implementability, and to determine what components should comprise the final GUIDE-IT prototype.

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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Peru 2 4%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 53 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 21%
Researcher 10 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 14 25%
Unknown 6 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 33%
Social Sciences 8 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 12 21%
Unknown 9 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 February 2014.
All research outputs
#5,701,020
of 11,344,026 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#494
of 1,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,242
of 212,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#26
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,344,026 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,106 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 212,140 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.