↓ Skip to main content

Conceptualising a model to guide nursing and midwifery in the community guided by an evidence review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nursing, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
198 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
Conceptualising a model to guide nursing and midwifery in the community guided by an evidence review
Published in
BMC Nursing, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12912-017-0225-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Patricia Leahy-Warren, Helen Mulcahy, Lazelle Benefield, Colin Bradley, Alice Coffey, Ann Donohoe, Serena Fitzgerald, Tim Frawley, Elizabeth Healy, Maria Healy, Marcella Kelly, Bernard McCarthy, Kathleen McLoughlin, Catherine Meagher, Rhona O’Connell, Aoife O’Mahony, Gillian Paul, Amanda Phelan, Diarmuid Stokes, Jessica Walsh, Eileen Savage

Abstract

Successful models of nursing and midwifery in the community delivering healthcare throughout the lifespan and across a health and illness continuum are limited, yet necessary to guide global health services. Primary and community health services are the typical points of access for most people and the location where most care is delivered. The scope of primary healthcare is complex and multifaceted and therefore requires a practice framework with sound conceptual and theoretical underpinnings. The aim of this paper is to present a conceptual model informed by a scoping evidence review of the literature. A scoping evidence review of the literature was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Databases included CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SocINDEX using the EBSCO platform and the Cochrane Library using the keywords: model, nursing, midwifery, community, primary care. Grey literature for selected countries was searched using the Google 'advanced' search interface. Data extraction and quality appraisal for both empirical and grey literature were conducted independently by two reviewers. From 127 empirical and 24 non-empirical papers, data extraction parameters, in addition to the usual methodological features, included: the nature of nursing and midwifery; the population group; interventions and main outcomes; components of effective nursing and midwifery outcomes. The evidence was categorised into six broad areas and subsequently synthesised into four themes. These were not mutually exclusive: (1) Integrated and Collaborative Care; (2) Organisation and Delivery of Nursing and Midwifery Care in the Community; (3) Adjuncts to Nursing Care and (4) Overarching Conceptual Model. It is the latter theme that is the focus of this paper. In essence, the model depicts a person/client on a lifespan and preventative-curative trajectory. The health related needs of the client, commensurate with their point position, relative to both trajectories, determines the nurse or midwife intervention. Consequently, it is this need, that determines the discipline or speciality of the nurse or midwife with the most appropriate competencies. Use of a conceptual model of nursing and midwifery to inform decision-making in primary/community based care ensures clinical outcomes are meaningful and more sustainable. Operationalising this model for nursing and midwifery in the community demands strong leadership and effective clinical governance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 198 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 198 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 28 14%
Student > Master 22 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 10%
Researcher 11 6%
Lecturer 11 6%
Other 36 18%
Unknown 71 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 70 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 7%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Psychology 8 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 7 4%
Other 13 7%
Unknown 75 38%
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 18 July 2017.
All research outputs
#5,291,993
of 24,892,887 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nursing
#169
of 908 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,153
of 320,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nursing
#6
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,892,887 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 908 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 320,643 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.