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 |
Development of a family physician impact assessment tool in the district health system of the Western Cape Province, South Africa
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12875-014-0204-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin S Pasio, Robert Mash, Tracey Naledi |
| Abstract |
BackgroundPolicy makers in Africa are ambivalent about the need for family physicians to strengthen district health services. Evidence on the impact of family physicians is therefore needed. The aim was to develop a tool to evaluate the impact of family physicians on district health services according to the six expected roles that have been defined nationally.MethodsMixed methods were used to develop, validate, pilot and test the reliability of the tool in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. An expert panel validated the content and construction of the tool. The tool was piloted by 94 respondents who evaluated eight family physicians. Cronbach alpha scores were calculated to test the reliability of the tool. The impact of these family physicians in the pilot study was also analysed.ResultsA draft tool was successfully developed, validated, and proved reliable (Cronbach alpha >0.8). The overall scores (scale of 1¿4) were: Care provider¿=¿3.5, Consultant¿=¿3.4, Leader and champion of clinical governance¿=¿3.4, Capacity builder¿=¿3.3, Clinical trainer and supervisor¿=¿3.2 and Champion of community-orientated primary care (COPC)¿=¿3.1. The impact on COPC was significantly less than the impact of other roles (p¿<¿0.05).ConclusionThe Family Physician Impact Evaluation Tool can be used to measure the impact of family physicians in South Africa. The pilot study shows that the family physicians are having most impact in terms of clinical care and clinical governance, and a lesser impact in terms of clinical training, capacity-building and especially COPC. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 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 > Master | 15 | 21% |
| Researcher | 10 | 14% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 23% |
| Unknown | 16 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 20 | 27% |
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 14 December 2014.
All research outputs
#17,302,400
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,716
of 2,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,109
of 363,363 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,361 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 363,363 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.