↓ Skip to main content

Using qualitative mixed methods to study small health care organizations while maximising trustworthiness and authenticity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 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
Using qualitative mixed methods to study small health care organizations while maximising trustworthiness and authenticity
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12913-014-0559-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christine B Phillips, Kathryn Dwan, Julie Hepworth, Christopher Pearce, Sally Hall

Abstract

BackgroundThe primary health care sector delivers the majority of health care in western countries through small, community-based organizations. However, research into these healthcare organizations is limited by the time constraints and pressure facing them, and the concern by staff that research is peripheral to their work. We developed Q-RARA¿Qualitative Rapid Appraisal, Rigorous Analysis¿to study small, primary health care organizations in a way that is efficient, acceptable to participants and methodologically rigorous.MethodsQ-RARA comprises a site visit, semi-structured interviews, structured and unstructured observations, photographs, floor plans, and social scanning data. Data were collected over the course of one day per site and the qualitative analysis was integrated and iterative.ResultsWe found Q-RARA to be acceptable to participants and effective in collecting data on organizational function in multiple sites without disrupting the practice, while maintaining a balance between speed and trustworthiness.ConclusionsThe Q-RARA approach is capable of providing a richly textured, rigorous understanding of the processes of the primary care practice while also allowing researchers to develop an organizational perspective. For these reasons the approach is recommended for use in small-scale organizations both within and outside the primary health care sector.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 77 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 12%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 18 23%
Unknown 15 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 14%
Social Sciences 9 12%
Psychology 5 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Other 17 22%
Unknown 18 23%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 December 2014.
All research outputs
#15,311,799
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,551
of 7,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,225
of 362,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#98
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 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 362,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 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.