| Title |
Attitudes to risk taking in medical decision making among British, Dutch and Belgian general practitioners.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of General Practice, April 1990
|
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R Grol, M Whitfield, J De Maeseneer, H Mokkink |
| Abstract |
The attitudes of groups of general practitioners in Belgium, the UK and the Netherlands to risk taking in medical decision making have been determined. The results indicate that many doctors seek to minimize the risks that they take when treating patients. Doctors in Belgium had the highest levels of 'no risk-taking' attitudes with 60% preferring not to take risks; Dutch doctors had the lowest levels with only 24% preferring not to take risks. Possible explanations for this difference include the differences in doctor-patient relationship and the systems of medical education in these two countries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Mexico | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 15 | 24% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 25% |
| Psychology | 8 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 11% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 21% |
| Unknown | 12 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 October 2022.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#3,378
of 4,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,912
of 15,190 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,877 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 15,190 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.