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 |
Development of key performance indicators to evaluate centralized intake for patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Arthritis Research & Therapy, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13075-015-0843-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claire E. Barber, Jatin N. Patel, Linda Woodhouse, Christopher Smith, Stephen Weiss, Joanne Homik, Sharon LeClercq, Dianne Mosher, Tanya Christiansen, Jane Squire Howden, Tracy Wasylak, James Greenwood-Lee, Andrea Emrick, Esther Suter, Barb Kathol, Dmitry Khodyakov, Sean Grant, Denise Campbell-Scherer, Leah Phillips, Jennifer Hendricks, Deborah A. Marshall |
| Abstract |
Centralized intake is integral to healthcare systems to support timely access to appropriate health services. The aim of this study was to develop key performance indicators (KPIs) to evaluate centralized intake systems for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) and rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Phase 1 involved stakeholder meetings including healthcare providers, managers, researchers and patients to obtain input on candidate KPIs, aligned along six quality dimensions: appropriateness, accessibility, acceptability, efficiency, effectiveness, and safety. Phase 2 involved literature reviews to ensure KPIs were based on best practices and harmonized with existing measures. Phase 3 involved a three-round, online modified Delphi panel to finalize the KPIs. The panel consisted of two rounds of rating and a round of online and in-person discussions. KPIs rated as valid and important (≥7 on a 9-point Likert scale) were included in the final set. Twenty-five KPIs identified and substantiated during Phases 1 and 2 were submitted to 27 panellists including healthcare providers, managers, researchers, and patients in Phase 3. After the in-person meeting, three KPIs were removed and six were suggested. The final set includes 9 OA KPIs, 10 RA KPIs and 9 relating to centralized intake processes for both conditions. All 28 KPIs were rated as valid and important. Arthritis stakeholders have proposed 28 KPIs that should be used in quality improvement efforts when evaluating centralized intake for OA and RA. The KPIs measure five of the six dimensions of quality and are relevant to patients, practitioners and health systems. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 24 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 13% |
| Engineering | 5 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 20% |
| Unknown | 26 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 15 December 2020.
All research outputs
#2,575,110
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#509
of 3,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,962
of 292,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis Research & Therapy
#24
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 292,406 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.