↓ Skip to main content

Presenting the primary care team to the public: a qualitative exploration of general practice websites

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
82 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Presenting the primary care team to the public: a qualitative exploration of general practice websites
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, February 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x695009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen Anderson, Joy Adamson, Yvonne Birks

Abstract

Increasing demand and expanded primary care provision, coupled with a reduced GP workforce, present challenges for primary care. New workforce models aim to reduce GP workload by directing patients to a variety of alternative clinicians. Concurrently, the principle of patient choice in relation to healthcare providers has gained prominence. It is, therefore, necessary to provide patients with sufficient information to negotiate access to appropriate primary healthcare professionals. To explore how practice websites present three exemplar healthcare professional groups (GPs, advanced nurse practitioners [ANPs], and practice nurses [PNs]) to patients and the implications for informing appropriate consultation choices. Qualitative thematic analysis of a sample of general practice websites. In total, 79 accessible websites from a metropolitan district in the north of England were thematically analysed in relation to professional representation and signposting of the three identified professional groups. Information about each group was incomplete, inconsistent, and sometimes inaccurate across the majority of general practice websites. There was a lack of coherence and strategy in representation and direction of website users towards appropriate primary healthcare practitioners. Limited and unclear representation of professional groups on general practice websites may have implications for the direction of patients to the wider clinical healthcare team. Patients may not have appropriate information to make choices about consulting with different healthcare practitioners. This constitutes a missed opportunity to signpost patients to appropriate clinicians and enhance understanding of different professional roles. The potential for websites to disseminate information to the public is not being maximised.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 82 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Other 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 14 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 15 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. 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 29 September 2023.
All research outputs
#783,508
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#336
of 4,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,090
of 455,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#11
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,904 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 455,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.