↓ Skip to main content

Qualitative description – the poor cousin of health research?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1319 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1263 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
Qualitative description – the poor cousin of health research?
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, July 2009
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-9-52
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mette Asbjoern Neergaard, Frede Olesen, Rikke Sand Andersen, Jens Sondergaard

Abstract

The knowledge and use of qualitative description as a qualitative research approach in health services research is limited.The aim of this article is to discuss the potential benefits of a qualitative descriptive approach, to identify its strengths and weaknesses and to provide examples of use.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 6 <1%
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Other 6 <1%
Unknown 1238 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 266 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 200 16%
Student > Bachelor 113 9%
Researcher 101 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 67 5%
Other 227 18%
Unknown 289 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 265 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 225 18%
Social Sciences 159 13%
Psychology 73 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 32 3%
Other 162 13%
Unknown 347 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,907,384
of 23,510,717 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#261
of 2,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,328
of 111,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,510,717 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 2,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 111,575 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.