↓ Skip to main content

Understanding healthcare practices in superdiverse neighbourhoods and developing the concept of welfare bricolage: Protocol of a cross-national mixed-methods study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, June 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
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 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
Understanding healthcare practices in superdiverse neighbourhoods and developing the concept of welfare bricolage: Protocol of a cross-national mixed-methods study
Published in
BMC Public Health, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12914-015-0055-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jenny Phillimore, Hannah Bradby, Michi Knecht, Beatriz Padilla, Tilman Brand, Sin Yi Cheung, Simon Pemberton, Hajo Zeeb

Abstract

Diversity in Europe has both increased and become more complex posing challenges to both national and local welfare state regimes. Evidence indicates specific barriers for migrant, faith and minority ethnic groups when accessing healthcare. However, previous studies of health in diverse cities in European countries have mainly adopted an ethno-national focus. Taking into account the new complexity of diversity within cities, a deeper and multi-faceted understanding of everyday health practices in superdiverse contexts is needed to support appropriate healthcare provision. This protocol describes a mixed method study investigating how residents in superdiverse neighbourhoods access healthcare. The study will include participant observation and qualitative interviewing as well as a standardised health survey and will be carried out in eight superdiverse neighbourhoods - with varying deprivations levels and trajectories of change - in four European countries (Germany, Portugal, Sweden and UK). In each neighbourhood, trained polylingual community researchers together with university researchers will map formal and informal provision and infrastructures supportive to health and healthcare. In-depth interviews with residents and healthcare providers in each country will investigate local health-supportive practices. Thematic analysis will be used to identify different types of help-seeking behaviours and support structures across neighbourhoods and countries. Using categories identified from analyses of interview material, a health survey will be set up investigating determinants of access to healthcare. Complex models, such as structural equation modelling, will be applied to analyse commonalities and differences between population groups, neighbourhoods and countries. This study offers the potential to contribute to a deeper understanding of how residents in superdiverse neighbourhoods deal with health and healthcare in everyday practices. The findings will inform governmental authorities, formal and informal healthcare providers how to further refine health services and how to achieve equitable access in diverse population groups.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 96 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 26%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 19 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 23 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 8%
Psychology 5 5%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 21 22%
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 29 June 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,335
of 17,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,438
of 277,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#196
of 254 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 277,854 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 254 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.