| Title |
Effect of facemasks on empathy and relational continuity: a randomised controlled trial in primary care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-14-200 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carmen Ka Man Wong, Benjamin Hon Kei Yip, Stewart Mercer, Sian Griffiths, Kenny Kung, Martin Chi-sang Wong, Josette Chor, Samuel Yeung-shan Wong |
| Abstract |
There is limited evidence to support the use of facemasks in preventing infection for primary care professionals. Negative effects on communication has been suggested when the physician wears a facemask. As communication skills and doctor patient relationship are essential to primary care consultations, the effects of doctor's facemask wearing were explored. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 455 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 States | 82 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 54 | 12% |
| Canada | 16 | 4% |
| Spain | 7 | 2% |
| Australia | 7 | 2% |
| France | 6 | 1% |
| Ireland | 3 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 3 | <1% |
| South Africa | 3 | <1% |
| Other | 23 | 5% |
| Unknown | 251 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 389 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 41 | 9% |
| Scientists | 18 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 1% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 242 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Egypt | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 240 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 42 | 17% |
| Researcher | 25 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 45 | 19% |
| Unknown | 68 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 13% |
| Psychology | 22 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 38 | 16% |
| Unknown | 78 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 461. 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 January 2024.
All research outputs
#60,111
of 25,715,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1
of 2,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#452
of 322,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#1
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,715,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,381 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 322,739 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.