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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Population health needs as predictors of variations in NHS practice payments: a cross-sectional study of English general practices in 2013–2014 and 2014–2015
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of General Practice, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3399/bjgp16x688345 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Louis S Levene, Richard Baker, Andrew Wilson, Nicola Walker, Kambiz Boomla, M John G Bankart |
| Abstract |
NHS general practice payments in England include pay for performance elements and a weighted component designed to compensate for workload, but without measures of specific deprivation or ethnic groups. To determine whether population factors related to health needs predicted variations in NHS payments to individual general practices in England. Cross-sectional study of all practices in England, in financial years 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. Descriptive statistics, univariable analyses (examining correlations between payment and predictors), and multivariable analyses (undertaking multivariable linear regressions for each year, with logarithms of payments as the dependent variables, and with population, practice, and performance factors as independent variables) were undertaken. Several population variables predicted variations in adjusted total payments, but inconsistently. Higher payments were associated with increases in deprivation, patients of older age, African Caribbean ethnic group, and asthma prevalence. Lower payments were associated with an increase in smoking prevalence. Long-term health conditions, South Asian ethnic group, and diabetes prevalence were not predictive. The adjusted R(2) values were 0.359 (2013-2014) and 0.374 (2014-2015). A slightly different set of variables predicted variations in the payment component designed to compensate for workload. Lower payments were associated with increases in deprivation, patients of older age, and diabetes prevalence. Smoking prevalence was not predictive. There was a geographical differential. Population factors related to health needs were, overall, poor predictors of variations in adjusted total practice payments and in the payment component designed to compensate for workload. Revising the weighting formula and extending weighting to other payment components might better support practices to address these needs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 67% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 56% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 44% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 73 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 23 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 6 | 8% |
| Psychology | 5 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 14% |
| Unknown | 26 | 36% |
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 01 June 2022.
All research outputs
#6,513,651
of 23,509,982 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#2,191
of 4,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,609
of 418,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#50
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,509,982 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.4. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 418,310 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.