↓ Skip to main content

Be SMART: examining the experience of implementing the NHS Health Check in UK primary care

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 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
Be SMART: examining the experience of implementing the NHS Health Check in UK primary care
Published in
BMC Primary Care, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12875-014-0212-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel L Shaw, Helen M Pattison, Carol Holland, Richard Cooke

Abstract

BackgroundThe NHS Health Check was designed by UK Department of Health to address increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease by identifying risk levels and facilitating behaviour change. It constituted biomedical testing, personalised advice and lifestyle support. The objective of the study was to explore Health Care Professionals¿ (HCPs) and patients¿ experiences of delivering and receiving the NHS Health Check in an inner-city region of England.MethodsPatients and HCPs in primary care were interviewed using semi-structured schedules. Data were analysed using Thematic Analysis.ResultsFour themes were identified. Firstly, Health Check as a test of `roadworthiness¿ for people. The roadworthiness metaphor resonated with some patients but it signified a passive stance toward illness. Some patients described the check as useful in the theme, Health check as revelatory. HCPs found visual aids demonstrating levels of salt/fat/sugar in everyday foods and a `traffic light¿ tape measure helpful in communicating such `revelations¿ with patients. Being SMART and following the protocol revealed that few HCPs used SMART goals and few patients spoke of them. HCPs require training to understand their rationale compared with traditional advice-giving. The need for further follow-up revealed disparity in follow-ups and patients were not systematically monitored over time.ConclusionsHCPs¿ training needs to include the use and evidence of the effectiveness of SMART goals in changing health behaviours. The significance of fidelity to protocol needs to be communicated to HCPs and commissioners to ensure consistency. Monitoring and measurement of follow-up, e.g., tracking of referrals, need to be resourced to provide evidence of the success of the NHS Health Check in terms of healthier lifestyles and reduced CVD risk.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 118 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 22%
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 12%
Researcher 11 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 27 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 28 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 16%
Psychology 8 7%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 33 28%
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 09 February 2015.
All research outputs
#20,744,283
of 25,487,317 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,971
of 2,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,247
of 360,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#36
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,487,317 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,379 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 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 360,144 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.