↓ Skip to main content

Patient use of blood pressure self-screening facilities in general practice waiting rooms: a qualitative study in the UK

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
33 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Patient use of blood pressure self-screening facilities in general practice waiting rooms: a qualitative study in the UK
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, May 2017
DOI 10.3399/bjgp17x690881
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice C Tompson, Sabrina Grant, Sheila M Greenfield, Richard J McManus, Susannah Fleming, Carl J Heneghan, FD Richard Hobbs, Alison M Ward

Abstract

Blood pressure (BP) self-screening, whereby members of the public have access to BP monitoring equipment outside of healthcare consultations, may increase the detection and treatment of hypertension. Currently in the UK such opportunities are largely confined to GP waiting rooms. To investigate the reasons why people do or do not use BP self-screening facilities. A cross-sectional, qualitative study in Oxfordshire, UK. Semi-structured interviews with members of the general public recruited using posters in GP surgeries and community locations were recorded, transcribed, and coded thematically. Of the 30 interviewees, 20% were hypertensive and almost half had self-screened. Those with no history of elevated readings had limited concern over their BP: self-screening filled the time waiting for their appointment or was done to help their doctor. Patients with hypertension self-screened to avoid the feelings they associated with 'white coat syndrome' and to introduce more control into the measurement process. Barriers to self-screening included a lack of awareness, uncertainty about technique, and worries over measuring BP in a public place. An unanticipated finding was that several interviewees preferred monitoring their BP in the waiting room than at home. BP self-screening appeared acceptable to service users. Further promotion and education could increase awareness among non-users of the need for BP screening, the existence of self-screening facilities, and its ease of use. Waiting room monitors could provide an alternative for patients with hypertension who are unwilling or unable to monitor at home.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 6 9%
Librarian 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 26 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 26 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 23 February 2018.
All research outputs
#1,025,951
of 23,866,543 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#483
of 4,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,657
of 312,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#17
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,866,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 312,522 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 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.