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 |
Examining the practice of generalist expertise: a qualitative study identifying constraints and solutions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JRSM Open, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1177/2042533313510155 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joanne Reeve, Christopher F Dowrick, George K Freeman, Jane Gunn, Frances Mair, Carl May, Stewart Mercer, Victoria Palmer, Amanda Howe, Greg Irving, Alice Shiner, Jessica Watson |
| Abstract |
Provision of person-centred generalist care is a core component of quality primary care systems. The World Health Organisation believes that a lack of generalist primary care is contributing to inefficiency, ineffectiveness and inequity in healthcare. In UK primary care, General Practitioners (GPs) are the largest group of practising generalists. Yet GPs fulfil multiple roles and the pressures of delivering these roles along with wider contextual changes create real challenges to generalist practice. Our study aimed to explore GP perceptions of enablers and constraints for expert generalist care, in order to identify what is needed to ensure health systems are designed to support the generalist role. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 | 9 | 56% |
| Japan | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 50% |
| Scientists | 6 | 38% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Argentina | 1 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 18% |
| Unknown | 27 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 41% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 28 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 06 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,819,391
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from JRSM Open
#42
of 346 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,774
of 327,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JRSM Open
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 346 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 327,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.