↓ Skip to main content

Patient removals from general practitioner lists in Northern Ireland: 1987-1996.

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, October 1998
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 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 removals from general practitioner lists in Northern Ireland: 1987-1996.
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, October 1998
Pubmed ID
Authors

D O'Reilly, K Steele, B Merriman, A Gilliland, S Brown

Abstract

Being struck off a general practitioner's list is a major event for patients and a subject for much media attention. However, it has not hitherto received much research attention. To quantify the numbers of patients removed at doctors' request in Northern Ireland between 1987 and 1996. To describe the characteristics of those removed and to determine if the rate of removal has increased. This is a descriptive epidemiological study involving a secondary data analysis of records held by the Central Services Agency. Six thousand five hundred and seventy-eight new patients were removed at general practitioner (GP) request between 1987 and 1996. This equated to 3920 removal decisions, a rate of 2.43 per 10,000 person-years. The very young and young adults had the highest rates of removal; most of the young being removed as part of a family. Ten point six per cent of removed patients had a repeat removal, and 16.3% of first removal decisions required an assignment to another practice. Family removals have decreased and individual removals have increased over the 10 years. Disadvantaged and densely populated areas with high population turnover were associated with higher rates of removal, though heterogeneity is evident between general practitioners serving similar areas. Compared to the period 1987 to 1991, removal rates for the years 1992 to 1993 were reduced by 20.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) for rate ratio (RR) 0.73-0.87), and those for the years 1994 to 1996 increased by 8% (95% CI = 1.01-1.16). The greatest increase was in the over-75 years age group (standardized RR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.57-1.62). Removals are relatively rare events for both patients and practices, though they have been increasing in recent years. Further research is needed to understand the processes that culminate in a removal.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 9%
Unknown 10 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Professor 1 9%
Researcher 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 27%
Social Sciences 2 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 15 May 2017.
All research outputs
#4,837,286
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#1,911
of 4,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,404
of 32,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 32,088 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them