↓ Skip to main content

Social disparities in patient safety in primary care: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
29 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
Social disparities in patient safety in primary care: a systematic review
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12939-018-0828-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlotta Piccardi, Jens Detollenaere, Pierre Vanden Bussche, Sara Willems

Abstract

Patient safety is a quality indicator for primary care and it should be based on individual needs, and not differ among different social groups. Nevertheless, the attention on social disparities in patient safety has been mainly directed towards the hospital care, often overlooking the primary care setting. Therefore, this paper aims to synthesise social disparities in patient safety in the primary care setting. The Databases PubMed and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies published between January 1st 2006 and January 31st 2017. Papers investigating racial, gender and socioeconomic disparities in regards to administrative errors, diagnostic errors, medication errors and transition of care errors in primary care were included. No distinction in terms of participants' age was made. Women and black patients are more likely to experience patient safety events in primary care, although it depends on the type of disease, treatment, and healthcare service. The available literature largely describes gender and ethnic disparities in the different patient safety domains whilst income and educational level are studied to a lesser extent. The results of this systematic review suggest that vulnerable social groups are likely to experience adverse patient safety events in primary care. Enhancing family doctors' awareness of these inequities is a necessary first step to tackle them and improve patient safety for all patients. Future research should focus on social disparities in patient safety using socioeconomic indicators, such as income and education.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 134 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 15%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 9 7%
Other 33 25%
Unknown 37 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 16%
Psychology 5 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 2%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 48 36%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 21 March 2019.
All research outputs
#1,226,482
of 19,965,580 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#176
of 1,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,920
of 295,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,965,580 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 295,267 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them