↓ Skip to main content

Academic detailing of general practitioners by a respiratory physician for diagnosis and management of refractory breathlessness: a randomised pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, May 2015
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 (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Academic detailing of general practitioners by a respiratory physician for diagnosis and management of refractory breathlessness: a randomised pilot study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0861-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aileen Collier, Debra Rowett, Peter Allcroft, Aine Greene, David C. Currow

Abstract

Academic detailing (AD; also known as educational visiting) facilitates the translation of evidence into practice and has been widely adopted internationally to facilitate practice change. The potential of AD linked to a specific patient and delivered by a specialist physician to general practitioners has not been evaluated. This pilot study assessed the feasibility and acceptability of AD on the knowledge and confidence of GPs caring for people with advanced cancer who had breathlessness at the end of life. In this randomised controlled pilot, 35 patient/GP dyads were randomised to AD or usual care. Key messages included: ensuring reversible causes were optimally treated; non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments were considered; and oxygen considered for hypoxaemic patients. Acceptability: The majority of GPs randomised to AD agreed to participate, reporting benefits to practice. The majority of GPs in the control group requested a copy of academic detailing written materials at study completion. Feasibility: AD visits to GPs' offices could be timetabled reasonably easily, with 24 detailing visits occurring. Self-reported knowledge and beliefs: Ninety two percent of GPs reported the topics covered in the AD sessions were useful, with 83 % reporting an increase in knowledge and confidence. AD sessions resulted in 58 % of GPs reporting a change in their approach to the management of breathlessness. By contrast, 81 % of the usual care group reported low confidence in the management and knowledge of breathlessness. AD was acceptable and feasible to participating GPs. This pilot supports proceeding to a fully powered study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 14%
Psychology 5 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Mathematics 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 14 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 January 2018.
All research outputs
#6,251,951
of 25,364,653 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,751
of 8,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,745
of 270,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#36
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,364,653 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 8,620 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 270,651 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.