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 |
A systematic review of pharmacy health coaching and an evaluation of patient outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.04.012 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Harjit K Singh, Gerard A Kennedy, Ieva Stupans |
| Abstract |
Pharmacy health coaching is a nascent topic offering promise on several fronts. There is considerable benefit to discerning the contributions thus far and future directions of pharmacy health coaching and research of the topic. The objective of this review was to synthesize the available empirical evidence regarding pharmacy health coaching and to define it. This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. CINHAL, EMBASE, PubMed, PsychINFO and SCOPUS) were searched (2000-2017) to identify sources related to pharmacy health coaching. Included articles were reviewed for their definition and outcomes of health coaching as well as recurring terms/themes pertaining to health coaching. Ten papers met the eligibility criteria. The results of each empirical study as well as the definitions were used to identify the key outcomes associated with pharmacy health coaching and were then cross tabulated. The most commonly occurring outcome of health coaching was an improvement in a health outcome of a target population. An improvement in medication management/adherence and the relationship between health professionals was equally evident. Lastly, an improved attitude towards drug therapy was referred to more often than the cost-effectiveness of health coaching. The evaluations enabled the formulation of a grounded definition of health coaching. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 | 1 | 14% |
| Australia | 1 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 26 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 26 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 February 2023.
All research outputs
#2,656,974
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy
#230
of 1,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,023
of 340,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy
#4
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,701 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 340,550 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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.