↓ Skip to main content

Variability in screening prevention activities in primary care in Spain: a multilevel analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
Variability in screening prevention activities in primary care in Spain: a multilevel analysis
Published in
BMC Public Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1767-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Magdalena Rosell-Murphy, Teresa Rodriguez-Blanco, Julio Morán, Mariona Pons-Vigués, Josep M Elorza-Ricart, Jordi Rodríguez, Clara Pareja, María Ángeles Nuin, Bonaventura Bolíbar

Abstract

Despite evidence of the benefits of prevention activities, studies have reported only partial integration and great variability of screening in daily clinical practice. The study objectives were: 1) To describe Primary Health Care (PHC) screening for arterial hypertension, dyslipidaemia, obesity, tobacco use, and excessive alcohol consumption in 2008 in 2 regions of Spain, based on electronic health records, and 2) To assess and quantify variability in screening, and identify factors (of patient, general practitioners and PHC team) associated with being screened, that are common throughout the PHC population. Multicentre, cross-sectional study of individuals aged ≥16 years (N = 468,940) who visited the 426 general practitioners (GPs) in 44 PHC teams in Catalonia and Navarre in 2008. screening for hypertension, dyslipidaemia, obesity, tobacco use, and excessive alcohol consumption. Other variables were considered at the individual (sociodemographics, visits, health problems), GP and PHC team (region among others). Individual and contextual factors associated with the odds of being screened and the variance attributable to each level were identified using the SAS PROC GLIMMIX macro. The most prevalent screenings were for dyslipidaemia (64.4%) and hypertension (50.8%); the least prevalent was tobacco use (36.6%). Overall, the odds of being screened were higher for women, older patients, those with more comorbidities, more cardiovascular risk factors, and more frequent office visits, and those assigned to a female GP, a GP with a lower patient load, or a PHC team with a lower percentage of patients older than 65 years. On average, individuals in Navarre were less likely to be screened than those in Catalonia. Hypertension and dyslipidaemia screenings had the least unexplained variability between PHC teams and GPs, respectively, after adjusting for individual and contextual factors. Of the studied screenings, those for obesity, tobacco, and alcohol use were the least prevalent. Attention to screening, especially for tobacco and alcohol, can be greatly improved in the PHC setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 3%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Indonesia 1 1%
Unknown 69 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 10 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Psychology 6 8%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 16 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 May 2015.
All research outputs
#14,683,190
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#10,801
of 14,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,054
of 264,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#172
of 236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 264,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.