↓ Skip to main content

The Effects of a Primary Care Transformation Initiative on Primary Care Physician Burnout and Workplace Experience

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 Mendeley
Title
The Effects of a Primary Care Transformation Initiative on Primary Care Physician Burnout and Workplace Experience
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11606-018-4545-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah N. Peikes, Kaylyn Swankoski, Sheila D. Hoag, Nancy Duda, Jared Coopersmith, Erin Fries Taylor, Nikkilyn Morrisson, Maya Palakal, John Holland, Timothy J. Day, Laura L. Sessums

Abstract

Physician burnout is associated with deleterious effects for physicians and their patients and might be exacerbated by practice transformation. Assess the effect of the Comprehensive Primary Care (CPC) initiative on primary care physician experience. Prospective cohort study conducted with about 500 CPC and 900 matched comparison practices. Mail surveys of primary care physicians, selected using cross-sectional stratified random selection 11 months into CPC, and a longitudinal design with sample replacement 44 months into CPC. Primary care physicians in study practices. A multipayer primary care transformation initiative (October 2012-December 2016) that required care delivery changes and provided enhanced payment, data feedback, and learning support. Burnout, control over work, job satisfaction, likelihood of leaving current practice within 2 years. More than 1000 physicians responded (over 630 of these in CPC practices) in each round (response rates 70-81%, depending on round and research group). Physician experience outcomes were similar for physicians in CPC and comparison practices. About one third of physician respondents in CPC and comparison practices reported high levels of burnout in each round (32 and 29% in 2013 [P = 0.59], and 34 and 36% in 2016 [P = 0.63]). Physicians in CPC and comparison practices reported some to moderate control over work, with an average score from 0.50 to 0.55 out of 1 in 2013 and 2016 (CPC-comparison differences of - 0.04 in 2013 [95% CI - 0.08-0.00, P = 0.07], and - 0.03 in 2016 [95% CI - 0.03-0.02, P = 0.19]). In 2016, roughly three quarters of CPC and comparison physicians were satisfied with their current job (77 and 74%, P = 0.77) and about 15% planned to leave their practice within 2 years (14 and 15%, P = 0.17). Despite requiring substantial practice transformation, CPC did not affect physician experience. Research should track effects of other transformation initiatives on physicians and test new ways to address burnout. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02320591.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 24 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 25%
Psychology 6 8%
Social Sciences 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 26 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 June 2021.
All research outputs
#4,184,346
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#2,744
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,397
of 299,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#50
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 299,387 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 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 62% of its contemporaries.