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 |
What, how and from whom do health care professionals learn during collaboration in palliative home care: a cross-sectional study in primary palliative care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-014-0501-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peter Pype, Wim Peersman, Johan Wens, Ann Stes, Bart Van den Eynden, Myriam Deveugele |
| Abstract |
BackgroundPalliative care often requires inter-professional collaboration, offering opportunities to learn from each other. General practitioners often collaborate with specialized palliative home care teams. This study seeks to identify what, how and from whom health care professionals learn during this collaboration.MethodsCross-sectional survey in Belgium. All palliative home care teams were invited to participate. General practitioners (n =267) and palliative care nurses (n =73) filled in questionnaires.ResultsGeneral practitioners (GPs) and palliative care nurses learned on all palliative care aspects. Different learning activities were used. Participants learned from all others involved in patient care. The professionals¿ discipline influences the content, the way of learning and who learns from whom. Multiple linear regression shows significant but limited association of gender with amount of learning by GPs (M¿<¿F; p¿=¿0.042; Adj R2¿=¿0.07) and nurses (M¿>¿F; p¿=¿0.019; Adj R2¿=¿0.01).ConclusionsThis study is the first to reveal what, how and from whom learning occurs during collaboration in palliative care. Training professionals in sharing expertise during practice and in detecting and adequately responding to others¿ learning needs, could optimize this way of learning. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 90 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 26% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 26 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 November 2014.
All research outputs
#15,310,081
of 22,770,070 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,549
of 7,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,290
of 262,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#118
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,770,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 262,837 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.