↓ Skip to main content

Implementation of recommended type 2 diabetes care for people with severe mental illness – a qualitative exploration with healthcare professionals

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
twitter
31 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 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
Implementation of recommended type 2 diabetes care for people with severe mental illness – a qualitative exploration with healthcare professionals
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12888-016-0942-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hayley McBain, Kathleen Mulligan, Frederique Lamontagne-Godwin, Julia Jones, Mark Haddad, Chris Flood, David Thomas, Alan Simpson

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators healthcare professionals experience when managing type 2 diabetes in people with severe mental illness (SMI). A qualitative semi-structured interview approach was employed. Questions were structured according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), which outlines 14 domains that can act as barriers and facilitators to changing behaviour. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. The data were coded according to the 14 domains of the TDF, belief statements were created within each domain and the most relevant belief statements within each domain identified through a consensus approach. Analyses were conducted by two researchers, and discrepancies agreed with a third researcher. Sixteen healthcare professionals, from a range of services, involved in the care of people with type 2 diabetes and SMI took part in an interview. Inter-rater reliability for each of the domains varied (25 %-74 %). All fourteen domains were deemed relevant, with 42 specific beliefs identified as important to the target behaviour. Participants identified having relevant knowledge and skills for diabetes management, prioritising this area of health, and reviewing health behaviours to develop action plans, as particularly important. At an organisational level, integrated care provision and shared information technology (IT) services between mental health and physical services, and clearly defined roles and responsibilities for the different professions, with designated time to undertake the work were identified as crucial. The findings highlight that healthcare professionals' experience a range of barriers and enablers when attempting to manage type 2 diabetes in people with SMI. These include organisational factors and individual beliefs, suggesting that interventions need to be targeted at both an organisation and individual level in order to change behaviour. Further work is needed to model these relationships in a larger sample of participants in line with the MRC guidance for developing complex interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 116 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Student > Master 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 33 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 15%
Social Sciences 10 9%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 37 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,029,720
of 25,169,746 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#286
of 5,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,552
of 363,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#8
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,169,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 363,918 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.