↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the inverse care law: a register and survey-based study of patient deprivation and burnout in general practice

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, December 2014
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
40 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Understanding the inverse care law: a register and survey-based study of patient deprivation and burnout in general practice
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12939-014-0121-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anette Fischer Pedersen, Peter Vedsted

Abstract

IntroductionAccording to the inverse care law, there is a mismatch between patients¿ medical needs and medical care supply. As an example, the number of doctors is often lower in areas with high deprivation compared to areas with no deprivation, and doctors with a deprived patient population may experience a high work pressure, have insufficient time for comprehensive tasks and be at higher risk for developing burnout. The mechanisms responsible for the inverse care law might be mutually reinforcing, but we know very little about this process. In this study, the association between patient deprivation and burnout in the general practitioners (GPs) was examined.MethodsActive GPs in the Central Denmark Region were invited to participate in a survey on job satisfaction and burnout and 601 GPs returned the questionnaire (72%). The Danish Regions provided information about which persons were registered with each practice, and information concerning socioeconomic characteristics for each patient on the list was obtained from Statistics Denmark. A composite deprivation index was also used.ResultsThere was significantly more burnout among GPs in the highest quartile of the deprivation index compared to GPs in the lowest quartile (OR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.06-3.44; p-value: 0.032). Among the eight variables included in the deprivation index, a high share of patients on social benefits was most strongly associated with burnout (OR: 2.62; 95% CI: 1.45-4.71; p-value: 0.001).ConclusionsA higher propensity of GP burnout was found among GPs with a high share of deprived patients on their lists compared to GPs with a low share of deprived patients. This applied in particular to patients on social benefits. This indicates that beside lower supply of GPs in deprived areas, people in these areas may also be served by GPs who are in higher risk of burnout and not performing optimally.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Turkey 1 1%
Unknown 92 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 27 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 33%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Psychology 6 6%
Philosophy 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 29 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 10 October 2021.
All research outputs
#1,250,985
of 24,010,679 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#177
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,215
of 363,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#4
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,010,679 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 363,911 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.