↓ Skip to main content

Health care providers’ perceived barriers to and need for the implementation of a national integrated health care standard on childhood obesity in the Netherlands – a mixed methods approach

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Health care providers’ perceived barriers to and need for the implementation of a national integrated health care standard on childhood obesity in the Netherlands – a mixed methods approach
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1324-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annemarie A. H. Schalkwijk, Giel Nijpels, Sandra D. M. Bot, Petra J. M. Elders

Abstract

In 2010, a national integrated health care standard for (childhood) obesity was published and disseminated in the Netherlands. The aim of this study is to gain insight into the needs of health care providers and the barriers they face in terms of implementing this integrated health care standard. A mixed-methods approach was applied using focus groups, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews and an e-mail-based internet survey. The study's participants included: general practitioners (GPs) (focus groups); health care providers in different professions (face-to-face interviews) and health care providers, including GPs; youth health care workers; pediatricians; dieticians; psychologists and physiotherapists (survey). First, the transcripts from the focus groups were analyzed thematically. The themes identified in this process were then used to analyze the interviews. The results of the analysis of the qualitative data were used to construct the statements used in the e-mail-based internet survey. Responses to items were measured on a 5-point Likert scale and were categorized into three outcomes: 'agree' or 'important' (response categories 1 and 2), 'disagree' or 'not important'. Twenty-seven of the GPs that were invited (51 %) participated in four focus groups. Seven of the nine health care professionals that were invited (78 %) participated in the interviews and 222 questionnaires (17 %) were returned and included in the analysis. The following key barriers were identified with regard to the implementation of the integrated health care standard: reluctance to raise the subject; perceived lack of motivation and knowledge on the part of the parents; previous negative experiences with lifestyle programs; financial constraints and the lack of a structured multidisciplinary approach. The main needs identified were: increased knowledge and awareness on the part of both health care providers and parents/children; a social map of effective intervention; structural funding; task rearrangements; a central care coordinator and structural information feedback from the health care providers involved. The integrated health care standard stipulate that the care of overweight or obese children be provided using an integrated approach. The barriers and needs identified in this study can be used to define strategies to improve the implementation of the integrated health care standard pertaining to overweight and obese children in the Netherlands.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 24 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 16%
Psychology 13 12%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 27 25%
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 09 March 2016.
All research outputs
#14,252,924
of 22,854,458 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,075
of 7,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,997
of 299,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#69
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 299,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.