↓ Skip to main content

Exploring approaches to patient safety: the case of spinal manipulation therapy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Exploring approaches to patient safety: the case of spinal manipulation therapy
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12906-016-1149-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linda Rozmovits, Silvano Mior, Heather Boon

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the current safety culture around the use of spinal manipulation therapy (SMT) by regulated health professionals in Canada and to explore perceptions of readiness for implementing formal mechanisms for tracking associated adverse events. Fifty-six semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with professional leaders and frontline practitioners in chiropractic, physiotherapy, naturopathy and medicine, all professions regulated to perform SMT in the provinces of Alberta and Ontario Canada. Interviews were digitally audio-recorded for verbatim transcription. Transcripts were entered into HyperResearch software for qualitative data analysis and were coded for both anticipated and emergent themes using the constant comparative method. A thematic, descriptive analysis was produced. The safety culture around SMT is characterized by substantial disagreement about its actual rather than putative risks. Competing intra- and inter-professional narratives further cloud the safety picture. Participants felt that safety talk is sometimes conflated with competition for business in the context of fee-for-service healthcare delivery by several professions with overlapping scopes of practice. Both professional leaders and frontline practitioners perceived multiple barriers to the implementation of an incident reporting system for SMT. The established 'measure and manage' approach to patient safety is difficult to apply to care which is geographically dispersed and delivered by practitioners in multiple professions with overlapping scopes of practice, primarily in a fee-for-service model. Collaboration across professions on models that allow practitioners to share information anonymously and help practitioners learn from the reported incidents is needed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 22%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 13 20%
Unknown 14 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 20 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 28%
Engineering 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 16 25%

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 09 June 2016.
All research outputs
#1,655,597
of 7,876,706 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#490
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,513
of 269,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#10
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,876,706 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 269,687 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.