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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
New self-management technologies for the treatment of hypertension: general practitioners’ perspectives
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Family Practice, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1093/fampra/cmx100 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eimear C Morrissey, Liam G Glynn, Monica Casey, Jane C Walsh, Gerard J Molloy |
| Abstract |
Digital health interventions, such as those that can be delivered via smartphone applications (apps) or wireless blood pressure monitors, offer a new, scalable and potentially cost-effective way to improve hypertension self-management. In Ireland, as is common in the UK, the majority of hypertension management occurs in general practice. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate how general practitioners (GPs) feel about and engage with the growth of these new methods of self-management of blood pressure. To explore GPs' perspectives of self-management technology to support medication adherence and blood pressure control in patients with hypertension. This was a qualitative interview study based in the West of Ireland. Ten GPs who were purposively sampled participated in semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis was carried out on the data. Three major themes were identified: current reach and future potential, empowerment and responsibility. GPs could see the benefit of using these technologies, such as more accurate blood pressure data and potential to engage patients in self-management. Concerns relating to the increased workload associated with a potentially unmanageable quantity of information and an increase in healthcare use among the 'worried well' also emerged strongly from the data. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 5 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 12% |
| Canada | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 53% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 65% |
| Scientists | 6 | 35% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 130 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 130 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Researcher | 9 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 14% |
| Unknown | 58 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 15% |
| Psychology | 7 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 11% |
| Unknown | 58 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 22 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,524,795
of 25,362,278 outputs
Outputs from Family Practice
#383
of 2,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,354
of 338,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Family Practice
#15
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,362,278 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 338,986 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.