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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A mixed methods study of collaboration between perinatal and infant mental health clinicians and other service providers: Do they sit in silos?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12913-015-0977-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen A. Myors, Michelle Cleary, Maree Johnson, Virginia Schmied |
| Abstract |
Women at risk of poor perinatal mental health benefit from coordinated approaches to care. Perinatal and infant mental health (PIMH) services have been established to support women with social and emotional needs. This paper examines the nature and extent of collaboration within two PIMH services in Australia. A convergent, embedded, mixed methods design was used. Two hundred and forty four medical records were reviewed, 13 professionals (six PIMH clinicians, two PIMH service managers, and five key stakeholders) and 11 women service-users participated in semi-structured interviews. Three broad themes were drawn from the data, Theme 1: We don't sit in silos … but they do, Theme 2: We need to enhance communication, and Theme 3: Collaboration is hard work. Perinatal and infant mental health clinicians believe they work collaboratively with other service providers. Key stakeholders and documentation in the medical records reveal that collaboration is nominal. Professionals believe that collaboration is essential for women with complex needs. Perinatal and infant mental health clinicians are skilled at building relationships with women, however further support is needed to build trusting relationships with other service providers. Women service-users also need to be involved in the collaborative process to become equal partners in their care. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 87 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Researcher | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 22 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 19% |
| Psychology | 15 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 25 | 28% |
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 12 September 2015.
All research outputs
#18,812,604
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,641
of 7,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,757
of 265,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#112
of 126 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,804 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. 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 265,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 126 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.