↓ Skip to main content

Experiences from a pilot study on how to conduct a qualitative multi-country research project regarding use of antibiotics in Southeast Europe

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Experiences from a pilot study on how to conduct a qualitative multi-country research project regarding use of antibiotics in Southeast Europe
Published in
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40545-016-0069-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanne Kaae, Sofia Kälvemark Sporrong, Janine Morgall Traulsen, Helle Wallach Kildemoes, Lotte Stig Nørgaard, Arianit Jakupi, Denis Raka, Emre Umut Gürpinar, Ali Alkan, Iris Hoxha, Admir Malaj, Lourdes Arevalo Cantarero

Abstract

In 2014, a qualitative multi-country research project was launched to study the reasons behind the high use of antibiotics in regions of Southeast Europe by using previously untrained national interviewers (who were engaged in other antibiotic microbial resistance-related investigations) to conduct qualitative interviews with local patients, physicians and pharmacists. Little knowledge exists about how to implement qualitative multi-country research collaborations involving previously untrained local data collectors. The aim of this paper was therefore to contribute to the knowledge regarding how to conduct these types of research projects by evaluating a pilot study of the project. Local data collectors conducted the study according to a developed protocol and evaluated the study with the responsible researcher-team from University of Copenhagen. The pilot study focused on 'local ownership', 'research quality' and 'feasibility' with regard to successful implementation and evaluation. The evaluation was achieved by interpreting 'Skype' and 'face to face' meetings and email correspondence by applying 'critical common sense'. Local data collectors achieved a sense of joint ownership. Overall, the protocol worked well. Several minor challenges pertaining to research quality and feasibility were identified, in particular obtaining narratives when conducting interviews and recruiting patients for the study. Furthermore, local data collectors found it difficult to allocate sufficient time to the project. Solutions were discussed and added to the protocol. Despite the challenges, it was possible to achieve an acceptable scientific level of research when conducting qualitative multi-country research collaboration under the given circumstances. Specific recommendations to achieve this are provided by the authors.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Other 2 7%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 6 22%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 15%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Other 7 26%
Unknown 3 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#5,420,287
of 17,361,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#127
of 286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,113
of 272,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,361,274 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 272,871 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 66% 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