↓ Skip to main content

Predicting clinical deterioration after initial assessment in out-of-hours primary care: a retrospective service evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Predicting clinical deterioration after initial assessment in out-of-hours primary care: a retrospective service evaluation
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, November 2016
DOI 10.3399/bjgp16x687961
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gail N Hayward, Charles Vincent, Daniel S Lasserson

Abstract

Accurate assessment of the need for admission is challenging in out-of-hours (OOH) primary care. Understanding more about patient contacts where the decision to continue care in the community may have been incorrect could assist clinicians in assessing clinical risk. To define the population contacting OOH primary care who are at higher risk of re-presenting to this service and requiring urgent transfer to secondary care within 3 days of their initial contact. Retrospective service evaluation of 4 years of patient contacts with Oxfordshire OOH primary care. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate demographic and service delivery factors associated with increased risk of delayed escalation to secondary care. Almost 1% of 496 931 patients contacting OOH primary care required escalation to secondary care within 3 days. Of these, 68.5% were initially discharged with no follow-up or advice to contact their GP; 14.7% were initially referred to secondary care. The odds of requiring escalation were increased with age (odds ratio [OR] 1.010; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.009 to 1.011; P<0.001), more frequent prior use of the OOH service (OR 1.016; 95% CI = 1.010 to 1.021; P<0.001), and presenting during periods of low call volume (OR 0.880; 95% CI = 0.857 to 0.904; P<0.001). Older, prior users of the service, presenting at less busy times, are at greater risk of requiring secondary care referral from the OOH service within 3 days of their initial contact. These higher-risk patient groups might benefit from active follow-up by the OOH service.

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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 21%
Student > Master 5 12%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 11 26%
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 22 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,267,429
of 23,322,258 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#2,102
of 4,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,468
of 313,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#51
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,258 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 4,354 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 313,833 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.