↓ Skip to main content

General practitioners’ perspectives on management of early-stage chronic kidney disease: a focus group study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
General practitioners’ perspectives on management of early-stage chronic kidney disease: a focus group study
Published in
BMC Primary Care, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0736-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carola van Dipten, Saskia van Berkel, Wim J. C. de Grauw, Nynke D. Scherpbier-de Haan, Bouke Brongers, Karel van Spaendonck, Jack F. M. Wetzels, Willem J. J. Assendelft, Marianne K. Dees

Abstract

Guideline adherence in chronic kidney disease management is low, despite guideline implementation initiatives. Knowing general practitioners' (GPs') perspectives of management of early-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) and the applicability of the national interdisciplinary guideline could support strategies to improve quality of care. Qualitative focus group study with 27 GPs in the Netherlands. Three analysts open-coded and comparatively analysed the data. Mind-mapping sessions were performed after data-saturation. Five themes emerged: defining CKD, knowledge and awareness, patient-physician interaction, organisation of CKD care and value of the guideline. A key finding was the abstractness of the CKD concept. The GPs expressed various perspectives about defining CKD and interpreting estimated glomerular filtration rates. Views about clinical relevance influenced the decision-making, although factual knowledge seems lacking. Striving to inform well enough without creating anxiety and to explain suitably for the intellectual ability of the patient caused tension in the patient-physician interaction. Integration with cardiovascular disease-management programmes was mentioned as a way of implementing CKD care in the future. The guideline was perceived as a rough guide rather than a leading document. CKD is perceived as an abstract rather than a clinical concept. Abstractness plays a role in all formulated themes. Management of CKD patients in primary care is complex and is influenced by physician-bound considerations related to individual knowledge and perception of the importance of CKD. Strategies are needed to improve GPs' understanding of the concept of CKD by education, a holistic approach to guidelines, and integration of CKD care into cardiovascular programmes. Not applicable.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Master 7 8%
Other 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 29 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 15%
Engineering 5 6%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 28 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,777,935
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,296
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,156
of 342,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#42
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 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 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 342,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.