| Title |
Differences in the Use of Primary Care Services Between Spanish National and Immigrant Patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10903-012-9647-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
L. A. Gimeno-Feliu, R. Magallón-Botaya, R. M. Macipe-Costa, L. Luzón-Oliver, J. L. Cañada-Millan, M. Lasheras-Barrio |
| Abstract |
Knowing what real use is made of health services by immigrant population is of great interest. The objectives are to analyze the use of primary care services by immigrants compared to Spanish nationals and to analyze these differences in relation to geographic origin. Retrospective observational study of all primary care visits made in 26 urban health centers. Main variable: total number of health centre visits/year. Dependent variables: type of clinician requested; type of attention, and origin of immigrants. The independent variable was nationality. Statistics were obtained from the electronic medical records. The 4,933,521 appointments made in 2007 were analyzed for a reference population of 594,145 people (11.15% immigrants). The adjusted annual frequency for nationals was 8.3, versus whereas 4.6 for immigrants. The immigrant population makes less use of primary care services than national population. This is evident for all age groups and regardless of the immigrants' countries of origin. This result is important when planning health care resources for immigrant population. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 85 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 11 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 20% |
| Unknown | 14 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 11% |
| Psychology | 6 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 06 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,807,620
of 25,726,194 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#81
of 1,375 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,309
of 178,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health
#3
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,726,194 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,375 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 178,280 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 94% 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 92% of its contemporaries.