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 |
Home support workers perceptions of family members of their older clients: a qualitative study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12877-015-0163-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joanie Sims-Gould, Kerry Byrne, Catherine Tong, Anne Martin-Matthews |
| Abstract |
Health care discourse is replete with references to building partnerships between formal and informal care systems of support, particularly in community and home based health care. Little work has been done to examine the relationship between home health care workers and family caregivers of older clients. The purpose of this study is to examine home support workers' (HSWs) perceptions of their interactions with their clients' family members. The goal of this research is to improve client care and better connect formal and informal care systems. A qualitative study, using in-depth interviews was conducted with 118 home support workers in British Columbia, Canada. Framework analysis was used and a number of strategies were employed to ensure rigor including: memo writing and analysis meetings. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and sent to a professional transcription agency. Nvivo 10 software was used to manage the data. Interactions between HSWs and family members are characterized in terms both of complementary labour (family members providing informational and instrumental support to HSWs), and disrupted labour (family members creating emotion work and additional instrumental work for HSWs). Two factors, the care plan and empathic awareness, further impact the relationship between HSWs and family caregivers. HSWs and family members work to support one another instrumentally and emotionally through interdependent interactions and empathic awareness. Organizational Care Plans that are too rigid or limited in their scope are key factors constraining interactions. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 10% |
| Psychology | 3 | 6% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 30% |
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 26 January 2016.
All research outputs
#12,821,848
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#1,862
of 3,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,107
of 388,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#38
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,189 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 388,813 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.