| Title |
Epidemiological strategies for adapting clinical practice guidelines to the needs of multimorbid patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-13-352 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eva Blozik, Hendrik van den Bussche, Felix Gurtner, Ingmar Schäfer, Martin Scherer |
| Abstract |
Clinical practice guidelines have been developed to improve the quality of health care. However, adherence to current monomorbidity-focused, mono-disciplinary guidelines may result in undesirable effects for persons with several comorbidities, in adverse interactions between drugs and diseases, conflicting management strategies, and polypharmacy. This is why new types of guidelines that address the problem of interacting medical interventions and conditions in multimorbid patients are needed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 8 | 57% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 14% |
| United States | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 57% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 29% |
| Scientists | 2 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 19% |
| Researcher | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 20 | 24% |
| Unknown | 7 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 42% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 28 February 2017.
All research outputs
#3,164,760
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,376
of 8,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,132
of 186,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#18
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,604 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 186,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.