| Title |
Recruitment difficulties in a primary care cluster randomised trial: investigating factors contributing to general practitioners' recruitment of patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-11-35 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew J Page, Simon D French, Joanne E McKenzie, Denise A O'Connor, Sally E Green |
| Abstract |
Recruitment of patients by health professionals is reported as one of the most challenging steps when undertaking studies in primary care settings. Numerous investigations of the barriers to patient recruitment in trials which recruit patients to receive an intervention have been published. However, we are not aware of any studies that have reported on the recruitment barriers as perceived by health professionals to recruiting patients into cluster randomised trials where patients do not directly receive an intervention. This particular subtype of cluster trial is commonly termed a professional-cluster trial. The aim of this study was to investigate factors that contributed to general practitioners recruitment of patients in a professional-cluster trial which evaluated the effectiveness of an intervention to increase general practitioners adherence to a clinical practice guideline for acute low-back pain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 75 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 23 | 29% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 13 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 39% |
| Psychology | 8 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 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 09 January 2013.
All research outputs
#15,260,208
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,500
of 2,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,115
of 109,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#13
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 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 2,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 109,299 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.