↓ Skip to main content

Using the scenario method in the context of health and health care – a scoping review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Using the scenario method in the context of health and health care – a scoping review
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12874-015-0083-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Horst Christian Vollmar, Thomas Ostermann, Marcus Redaèlli

Abstract

The scenario technique is a method for future research and for strategic planning. Today, it includes both qualitative and quantitative elements. The aims of this scoping review are to give an overview of the application of the scenario method in the fields of health care and to make suggestions for better reporting in future scenario projects. Between January 2013 and October 2013 we conducted a systematic search in the databases Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Eric, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cinahl since inception for the term 'scenario(s)' in combination with other terms, e.g. method, model, and technique. Our search was not restricted by date or language. In addition, we screened the reference lists of the included articles. A total of 576 bibliographical records were screened. After removing duplicates and three rounds of screening, 41 articles covering 38 different scenario projects were included for the final analysis. Nine of the included articles addressed disease related issues, led by mental health and dementia (n = 4), and followed by cancer (n = 3). Five scenario projects focused on public health issues at an organizational level and five focused on the labor market for different health care professionals. In addition, four projects dealt with health care 'in general', four with the field of biotechnology and personalized medicine, and additional four with other technology developments. Some of the scenario projects suffered from poor reporting of methodological aspects. Despite its potential, use of the scenario method seems to be published rarely in comparison to other methods such as the Delphi-technique, at least in the field of health care. This might be due to the complexity of the methodological approach. Individual project methods and activities vary widely and are poorly reported. Improved criteria are required for reporting of scenario project methods. With improved standards and greater transparency, the scenario method will be a good tool for scientific health care planning and strategic decision-making in public health.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Unspecified 10 19%
Student > Master 8 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 11 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 16 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 2020.
All research outputs
#5,824,149
of 21,752,314 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#892
of 1,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,979
of 269,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,752,314 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 269,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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