↓ Skip to main content

Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 1,798)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
104 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
182 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
278 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Involving patients in setting priorities for healthcare improvement: a cluster randomized trial
Published in
Implementation Science, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-9-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Antoine Boivin, Pascale Lehoux, Réal Lacombe, Jako Burgers, Richard Grol

Abstract

Patients are increasingly seen as active partners in healthcare. While patient involvement in individual clinical decisions has been extensively studied, no trial has assessed how patients can effectively be involved in collective healthcare decisions affecting the population. The goal of this study was to test the impact of involving patients in setting healthcare improvement priorities for chronic care at the community level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 104 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 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 3 1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 269 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 45 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 15%
Student > Master 37 13%
Student > Bachelor 22 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 6%
Other 64 23%
Unknown 52 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 90 32%
Social Sciences 36 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 13%
Psychology 10 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 3%
Other 34 12%
Unknown 66 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 81. 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 16 January 2023.
All research outputs
#523,302
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#38
of 1,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,686
of 231,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#3
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 231,889 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.