| Title |
An exploration of how nurse prescribing is being used for patients with respiratory conditions across the east of England
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-27 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nicola Carey, Karen Stenner, Molly Courtenay |
| Abstract |
There is a need to reduce symptoms, exacerbations and improve quality of life for patients with respiratory diseases. Across the world, increasing numbers of nurses are adopting the prescribing role and can potentially enhance service provision. Evidence suggests improved quality of care and efficiencies occur when nurses adopt the prescribing role. No evidence is available on the views of nurse prescribers who care for respiratory patients. The aim was to explore how nurse prescribing is being used for patients with respiratory conditions in different care settings across one strategic health authority, and whether this has benefited patients, healthcare professionals and the National Health Service. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 18% |
| Researcher | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 12% |
| Unknown | 37 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 37 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 February 2015.
All research outputs
#13,168,771
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,443
of 7,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,823
of 305,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#64
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,609 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 305,589 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.