↓ Skip to main content

The Australian Experiment: How Primary Health Care Organizations Supported the Evolution of a Primary Health Care System

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (formerly Journal of the American Board of Family Practice), March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The Australian Experiment: How Primary Health Care Organizations Supported the Evolution of a Primary Health Care System
Published in
Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (formerly Journal of the American Board of Family Practice), March 2012
DOI 10.3122/jabfm.2012.02.110219
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Nicholson, Claire L. Jackson, John E. Marley, Robert Wells

Abstract

Primary health care in Australia has undergone 2 decades of change. Starting with a vision for a national health strategy with general practice at its core, Australia established local meso-level primary health care organizations--Divisions of General Practice--moving from focus on individual practitioners to a professional collective local voice. The article identifies how these meso-level organizations have helped the Australian primary health care system evolve by supporting the roll-out of initiatives including national practice accreditation, a focus on quality improvement, expansion of multidisciplinary teams into general practice, regional integration, information technology adoption, and improved access to care. Nevertheless, there are still challenges to ensuring equitable access and the supply and distribution of a primary care workforce, addressing the increasing rates of chronic disease and obesity, and overcoming the fragmentation of funding and accountability in the Australian system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
New Zealand 2 2%
Malaysia 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
India 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 80 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 17%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Professor 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Other 23 26%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Social Sciences 10 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 7%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 17 19%
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 11 April 2013.
All research outputs
#7,310,010
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (formerly Journal of the American Board of Family Practice)
#890
of 1,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,382
of 168,572 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (formerly Journal of the American Board of Family Practice)
#11
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,814 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 168,572 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 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.