↓ Skip to main content

Community pharmacist attitudes towards collaboration with general practitioners: development and validation of a measure and a model

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Community pharmacist attitudes towards collaboration with general practitioners: development and validation of a measure and a model
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-320
Pubmed ID
Authors

Connie Van, Daniel Costa, Penny Abbott, Bernadette Mitchell, Ines Krass

Abstract

Community Pharmacists and General Practitioners (GPs) are increasingly being encouraged to adopt more collaborative approaches to health care delivery as collaboration in primary care has been shown to be effective in improving patient outcomes. However, little is known about pharmacist attitudes towards collaborating with their GP counterparts and variables that influence this interprofessional collaboration. This study aims to develop and validate 1) an instrument to measure pharmacist attitudes towards collaboration with GPs and 2) a model that illustrates how pharmacist attitudes (and other variables) influence collaborative behaviour with GPs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 2 2%
Brazil 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Ukraine 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 84 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 17 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 20 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 12%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 23 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#5,959,493
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,720
of 7,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,544
of 152,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#22
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,579 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 152,071 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.