↓ Skip to main content

The Model of Pathways to Treatment: Conceptualization and integration with existing theory

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of Health Psychology, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
241 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
249 Mendeley
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.
Title
The Model of Pathways to Treatment: Conceptualization and integration with existing theory
Published in
British Journal of Health Psychology, April 2012
DOI 10.1111/j.2044-8287.2012.02077.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. E. Scott, F. M. Walter, A. Webster, S. Sutton, J. Emery

Abstract

Studying and understanding pathways to diagnosis and treatment is vital for the development of successful interventions to encourage early detection, presentation, and diagnosis. An existing framework posited to describe the decisional and behavioural processes that occur prior to treatment (Andersen et al.'s General Model of Total Patient Delay) does not appear to match the complex and dynamic nature of the pathways into and through the health care system or provide a clear framework for research. Therefore a revised descriptive framework, the Model of Pathways to Treatment, has been proposed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 248 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 16%
Student > Master 39 16%
Researcher 27 11%
Student > Bachelor 24 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 6%
Other 54 22%
Unknown 51 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 68 27%
Psychology 28 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 10%
Social Sciences 18 7%
Unspecified 7 3%
Other 37 15%
Unknown 66 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 May 2019.
All research outputs
#15,593,749
of 24,712,008 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Health Psychology
#763
of 877 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,206
of 167,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Health Psychology
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,712,008 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 877 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 167,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.