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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Informal carers’ health-related quality of life and patient experience in primary care: evidence from 195,364 carers in England responding to a national survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12875-015-0277-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gwilym P.A. Thomas, Catherine L. Saunders, Martin O. Roland, Charlotte A.M. Paddison |
| Abstract |
We aim to describe the health-related quality of life of informal carers and their experiences of primary care. Responses from the 2011-12 English General Practice Patient Survey, including 195,364 informal carers, were analysed using mixed effect logistic regressions controlling for age, gender, ethnicity and social deprivation to describe carer health-related quality of life (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain, and anxiety/depression, measured using EQ-5D) and primary care experience (access, continuity and communication). Informal carers reported poorer health-related quality of life than non-carers of similar age, gender, ethnicity and social deprivation. Increasing caring commitment was associated with worse EQ-5D scores, with carers of 50+ hours a week scoring 0.05 points lower than non-carers (95 % CI 0.05 to 0.04), equivalent to 18 fewer days of full health annually. Considering each domain of EQ-5D separately, carers of 50+ hours/week were more likely to report pain OR = 1.53 (1.50-1.57), p < 0.0001, and anxiety/depression OR = 1.69 (1.66-1.73), p < 0.0001, than non-carers. Younger carers scored lower on EQ-5D than non-carer peers but the converse was true among over-85s. In the most deprived areas carers reported the equivalent of 37 fewer days of full health annually than carers in the most affluent areas. On average, carers reported poorer patient experiences in all areas of primary care than non-carers (odds ratios 0.84-0.97), with this difference being most marked in the domain of access. Informal carers experience a double disadvantage of poorer health-related quality of life and poorer patient experience in primary care. We find no evidence for health benefits of caregiving. We recommend physicians identify and treat carer health problems, including pain and anxiety/depression, particularly among young, deprived and high time-commitment carers. Improving patient experience for carers, including access to primary care, should be a priority. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 60% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 175 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 13% |
| Researcher | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 7% |
| Other | 36 | 20% |
| Unknown | 53 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 10% |
| Psychology | 17 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 9% |
| Unknown | 59 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,141,480
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#241
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,778
of 279,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#7
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 279,380 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.