↓ Skip to main content

Understanding ‘Good Health care’ from the Patient’s Perspective: Development of a Conceptual Model Using Group Concept Mapping

Overview of attention for article published in The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Understanding ‘Good Health care’ from the Patient’s Perspective: Development of a Conceptual Model Using Group Concept Mapping
Published in
The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40271-018-0320-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stacey A. McCaffrey, Emil Chiauzzi, Caroline Chan, Michael Hoole

Abstract

There is an increasing focus on measuring performance indicators of health care providers, but there is a lack of patient input into what defines 'good care.' The primary objective was to develop a conceptual model of 'good health care' from the patient's perspective. Exploratory analyses were also conducted to investigate (1) differences in patient priorities based on demographic and clinical factors, and (2) differences between patients and health stakeholders (e.g., clinicians, researchers) with respect to patient health care priorities. These objectives were accomplished using group concept mapping. Following statement generation, PatientsLikeMe members, Baltimore community members recruited through a university-affiliated clinic, and stakeholders individually sorted the statements into meaningful categories and rated the statements with respect to importance. Qualitative and quantitative analyses generated a final conceptual model. One hundred and fifty-seven patients and 17 stakeholders provided input during statement generation. The 1779-statement pool was reduced to 79 statements for the structuring (sorting and rating) activities. In total, 221 patients and 16 stakeholders completed structuring activities through group concept mapping software. Results yielded a 10-cluster solution, and patient priorities were found to be relatively invariant across demographic/clinical groups. Results were also similar between patients and stakeholders. This comprehensive qualitative and quantitative investigation is an important first step in developing patient-reported outcome performance measures that capture the aspects of health care that are most important and relevant for patients. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Other 5 9%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 15%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 05 April 2020.
All research outputs
#2,967,102
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
#94
of 549 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,324
of 331,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 549 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 331,439 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.