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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Prescribing Data in General Practice Demonstration (PDGPD) project - a cluster randomised controlled trial of a quality improvement intervention to achieve better prescribing for chronic heart failure and hypertension
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-12-273 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Margaret Williamson, Magnolia Cardona-Morrell, Jeffrey D Elliott, James F Reeve, Nigel P Stocks, Jon Emery, Judith M Mackson, Jane M Gunn |
| Abstract |
Research literature consistently documents that scientifically based therapeutic recommendations are not always followed in the hospital or in the primary care setting. Currently, there is evidence that some general practitioners in Australia are not prescribing appropriately for patients diagnosed with 1) hypertension (HT) and 2) chronic heart failure (CHF). The objectives of this study were to improve general practitioner's drug treatment management of these patients through feedback on their own prescribing and small group discussions with peers and a trained group facilitator. The impact evaluation includes quantitative assessment of prescribing changes at 6, 9, 12 and 18 months after the intervention. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 17% |
| Researcher | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 August 2012.
All research outputs
#15,249,959
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,521
of 7,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,592
of 169,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#87
of 114 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,577 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 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 169,307 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 114 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.