↓ Skip to main content

Factors associated with the achievement of cervical smears by general practitioners

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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
Factors associated with the achievement of cervical smears by general practitioners
Published in
BMC Research Notes, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2999-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michaël Rochoy, Thibaut Raginel, Jonathan Favre, Estelle Soueres, Nassir Messaadi, Valérie Deken, Alain Duhamel, Christophe Berkhout

Abstract

Reliable data about general practitioners performing pap-tests are insufficient. A claim code for the achievement of pap-smears exists in France, but its use by general practitioners is not known. The main purpose of this study was to highlight independent factors associated with the achievement of pap-smears by the general practitioner (GP). We carried out a descriptive and analytic epidemiologic study in 347 GPs and their 244,889 patients, registered at the Health Care Insurance Fund of Flanders. The European Deprivation Index (EDI) in the area of GP's surgeries was specified. All GPs were questioned by telephone about their performance of pap-tests. The claim database of the insurance fund was analyzed to describe characteristics of GPs. The answer rate among questioned GPs was 98.8%. Pap-smears were performed in their surgeries by 182 GPs (53.1%). Among males, 45.7% performed pap-smears versus 78.4% of the female (adjusted odds-ratio = 4.5, p < 0.001). The mean rate of screened women in the target population was 44% when GPs were performing smears versus 42% when they were not (adjusted odds-ratio = 1.04, p = 0.03). Only 19.5% of GPs used the claim code. The number of patients, and the EDI were not associated with pap-smears. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02749110 (April 22, 2016).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Unspecified 1 9%
Professor 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 36%
Sports and Recreations 1 9%
Social Sciences 1 9%
Unspecified 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 31 July 2019.
All research outputs
#4,389,051
of 17,803,527 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#661
of 3,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,593
of 419,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#65
of 421 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,803,527 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 419,284 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 421 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.