↓ Skip to main content

Involving patients in HTA activities at local level: a study protocol based on the collaboration between researchers and knowledge users

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 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
Involving patients in HTA activities at local level: a study protocol based on the collaboration between researchers and knowledge users
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-14
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie-Pierre Gagnon, Johanne Gagnon, Michèle St-Pierre, François-Pierre Gauvin, Florence Piron, Marc Rhainds, Martin Coulombe, Dolores Lepage-Savary, Marie Desmartis, Mylène Tantchou Dipankui, France Légaré

Abstract

The literature recognizes a need for greater patient involvement in health technology assessment (HTA), but few studies have been reported, especially at the local level. Following the decentralisation of HTA in Quebec, Canada, the last few years have seen the creation of HTA units in many Quebec university hospital centres. These units represent a unique opportunity for increased patient involvement in HTA at the local level. Our project will engage patients in an assessment being carried out by a local HTA team to assess alternatives to isolation and restraint for hospitalized or institutionalized adults. Our objectives are to: 1) validate a reference framework for exploring the relevance and applicability of various models of patient involvement in HTA, 2) implement strategies that involve patients (including close relatives and representatives) at different stages of the HTA process, 3) evaluate intervention processes, and 4) explore the impact of these interventions on a) the applicability and acceptability of recommendations arising from the assessment, b) patient satisfaction, and c) the sustainability of this approach in HTA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 102 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 20%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Other 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 28 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 7%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Psychology 5 5%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 30 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 October 2019.
All research outputs
#13,359,365
of 22,661,413 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,592
of 7,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,758
of 245,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#31
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,661,413 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 245,660 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.