↓ Skip to main content

The relevance of different trust models for representation in patient organizations: conceptual considerations

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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 relevance of different trust models for representation in patient organizations: conceptual considerations
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2368-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helene Gerhards, Karin Jongsma, Silke Schicktanz

Abstract

Trust within organizations is important for ensuring members' acceptance of the organization's activities and to expand their scope of action. Remarkably, Patient Organizations (POs) that often both function as a forum for self-help and represent patients on the health-political level, have been understudied in this respect. This paper analyzes the relation between trust and representation in POs. We distinguish between two models of representation originating from political theory: the trustee and delegate model and between two types of trust: horizontal and vertical trust. Our theoretical approach is illustrated with an analysis of 13 interviews with representatives of German POs. We have found that the delegate model requires horizontal trust and the trustee model vertical trust. Both models: horizontal/delegate and vertical/trustee exist within single POs. The representation process within POs demands a balancing act between inclusion of affected persons and strategically aggregating a clear-cut political claim. Trust plays in that process of coming from individual wishes to collective and political standpoints a major role both in terms of horizontal as well as vertical trust. Horizontal trust serves the communication between affected members, and vertical trust allows representatives to be decisive.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 11 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 18%
Social Sciences 5 18%
Psychology 3 11%
Philosophy 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 11 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 February 2019.
All research outputs
#5,943,294
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,709
of 7,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,337
of 312,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#68
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 312,560 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 158 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 56% of its contemporaries.