↓ Skip to main content

Doctors’ opinion on the contribution of coordination mechanisms to improving clinical coordination between primary and outpatient secondary care in the Catalan national health system

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Doctors’ opinion on the contribution of coordination mechanisms to improving clinical coordination between primary and outpatient secondary care in the Catalan national health system
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2690-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marta-Beatriz Aller, Ingrid Vargas, Jordi Coderch, Maria-Luisa Vázquez

Abstract

Clinical coordination is considered a health policy priority as its absence can lead to poor quality of care and inefficiency. A key challenge is to identify which strategies should be implemented to improve coordination. The aim is to analyse doctors' opinions on the contribution of mechanisms to improving clinical coordination between primary and outpatient secondary care and the factors influencing their use. A qualitative descriptive study in three healthcare networks of the Catalan national health system. A two-stage theoretical sample was designed: in the first stage, networks with different management models were selected; in the second, primary care (n = 26) and secondary care (n = 24) doctors. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. Final sample size was reached by saturation. A thematic content analysis was conducted, segmented by network and care level. With few differences across networks, doctors identified similar mechanisms contributing to clinical coordination: 1) shared EMR facilitating clinical information transfer and uptake; 2) mechanisms enabling problem-solving communication and agreement on clinical approaches, which varied across networks (joint clinical case conferences, which also promote mutual knowledge and training of primary care doctors; virtual consultations through EMR and email); and 3) referral protocols and use of the telephone facilitating access to secondary care after referrals. Doctors identified organizational (insufficient time, incompatible timetables, design of mechanisms) and professional factors (knowing each other, attitude towards collaboration, concerns over misdiagnosis) that influence the use of mechanisms. Mechanisms that most contribute to clinical coordination are feedback mechanisms, that is those based on mutual adjustment, that allow doctors to exchange information and communicate. Their use might be enhanced by focusing on adequate working conditions, mechanism design and creating conditions that promote mutual knowledge and positive attitudes towards collaboration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 17%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 5%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 40 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 17%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Computer Science 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 44 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 August 2019.
All research outputs
#7,031,309
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,454
of 7,706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,464
of 440,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#85
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 440,933 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 166 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.