↓ Skip to main content

An appraisal: how notifiable infectious diseases are reported by Hungarian family physicians

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
An appraisal: how notifiable infectious diseases are reported by Hungarian family physicians
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12879-018-2948-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katalin Vraukó, Zoltán Jancsó, László Kalabay, Andrea Lukács, Gabriella Maráczi, Lajos Mester, Anna Nánási, József Rinfel, Tamás Sárosi, Ferenc Tamás, Albert Varga, József Vitrai, Imre Rurik

Abstract

Within the frame of National Epidemiological Surveillance System, family physicians have an obligation to report infections and suspicions cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the knowledge, attitudes, daily practice and the reporting activities of Hungarian family physicians regarding to infectious diseases. A self-administered survey was developed, validated and used. The survey was completed by family physicians who had taken part in continuous medical educational programmes of all Hungarian medical faculties. The questionnaire, consisting demographic questions and 10 statements about their reporting habits were completed by 347 doctors, 8% of the total number of family physicians. The data were processed in a cross-sectional design with general linear model. According to the majority of responders, the current reporting system works efficiently. Rural physicians were mainly agreed, that reporting is not a simply obligation, it is a professional task as well. They were less hindered in daily work by reporting activities, waited less for laboratory confirmation before reporting, reported suspicious cases more frequently. Practitioner's based in urban settlements preferred to await laboratory tests before reporting and were hindered less by failures of the electronic reporting system. Older physicians trusted more in the recent system and they wished to increase the number of reports. Female physicians have higher consciousness in epidemiology. They were mostly in agreement that even severe infectious diseases can be diagnosed at primary care level and their daily practices were less burdened by reporting duties. Both the epidemiological knowledge of general practitioners' and the electronic surveillance systems should be improved. There is a need to develope the electronic infrastructure of primary care. More and regular control is also expected by the health care authorities, beside the synthesis of professional and governmental expectations and regulations.

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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Researcher 2 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 14 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 16 53%
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 22 January 2018.
All research outputs
#20,461,148
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#6,521
of 7,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#378,732
of 441,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#133
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,723 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 441,888 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.