↓ Skip to main content

Perspectives of policy and political decision makers on access to formal dementia care: expert interviews in eight European countries

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 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 (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
Perspectives of policy and political decision makers on access to formal dementia care: expert interviews in eight European countries
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2456-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anja Broda, Anja Bieber, Gabriele Meyer, Louise Hopper, Rachael Joyce, Kate Irving, Orazio Zanetti, Elisa Portolani, Liselot Kerpershoek, Frans Verhey, Marjolein de Vugt, Claire Wolfs, Siren Eriksen, Janne Røsvik, Maria J. Marques, Manuel Gonçalves-Pereira, Britt-Marie Sjölund, Bob Woods, Hannah Jelley, Martin Orrell, Astrid Stephan

Abstract

As part of the ActifCare (ACcess to Timely Formal Care) project, we conducted expert interviews in eight European countries with policy and political decision makers, or representatives of relevant institutions, to determine their perspectives on access to formal care for people with dementia and their carers. Each ActifCare country (Germany, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom) conducted semi-structured interviews with 4-7 experts (total N = 38). The interview guide addressed the topics "Complexity and Continuity of Care", "Formal Services", and "Public Awareness". Country-specific analysis of interview transcripts used an inductive qualitative content analysis. Cross-national synthesis focused on similarities in themes across the ActifCare countries. The analysis revealed ten common themes and two additional sub-themes across countries. Among others, the experts highlighted the need for a coordinating role and the necessity of information to address issues of complexity and continuity of care, demanded person-centred, tailored, and multidisciplinary formal services, and referred to education, mass media and campaigns as means to raise public awareness. Policy and political decision makers appear well acquainted with current discussions among both researchers and practitioners of possible approaches to improve access to dementia care. Experts described pragmatic, realistic strategies to influence dementia care. Suggested innovations concerned how to achieve improved dementia care, rather than transforming the nature of the services provided. Knowledge gained in these expert interviews may be useful to national decision makers when they consider reshaping the organisation of dementia care, and may thus help to develop best-practice strategies and recommendations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Master 7 10%
Other 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 16%
Social Sciences 8 11%
Psychology 6 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 25 34%

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 05 November 2019.
All research outputs
#2,915,297
of 18,062,643 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,271
of 6,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,704
of 279,934 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,062,643 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 6,135 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 279,934 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.