↓ Skip to main content

Implementing resources to support the diagnosis and management of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) in primary care: A qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Implementing resources to support the diagnosis and management of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) in primary care: A qualitative study
Published in
BMC Primary Care, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12875-016-0453-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kerin Bayliss, Lisa Riste, Rebecca Band, Sarah Peters, Alison Wearden, Karina Lovell, Louise Fisher, Carolyn A Chew-Graham

Abstract

Previous research has highlighted that many GPs lack the confidence and knowledge to diagnose and manage people with CFS/ME. Following the development of an online training module for GPs, and an information pack and DVD for patients, this study explored the extent to which these resources can be implemented in routine primary care. Semi structured qualitative interviews were completed with patients and GPs across North West England. All interviews were transcribed and analysed using open exploratory thematic coding. Following this thematic analysis, the authors conducted a further theory-driven analysis of the data guided by Normalisation Process Theory. When used in line with advice from the research team, the information resource and training were perceived as beneficial to both patients and GPs in the diagnosis and management of CFS/ME. However, 47 % of patients in this study did not receive the information pack from their GP. When the information pack was used, it was often incomplete, sent in the post, and GPs did not work with patients to discuss the materials. Only13 out of 21 practices completed the training module due to time pressures and the low priority placed on low prevalence, contentious, hard to manage conditions. When the module was completed, many GPs stated that it was not feasible to retain the key messages as they saw so few patients with the condition. Due to the complexity of the condition, GPs also believed that the diagnosis and management of CFS/ME should take place in a specialist care setting. While barriers to the implementation of training and resources for CFS/ME remain, there is a need to support CFS/ME patients to access reliable, evidence based information outside primary care. Our findings suggest that future research should develop an online resource for patients to support self-management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 24 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 16%
Psychology 7 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 26 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 15 September 2017.
All research outputs
#3,144,815
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#407
of 2,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,509
of 354,940 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#5
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 354,940 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.