| Title |
Unannounced Standardized Patient Assessment of the Roter Interaction Analysis System: The Challenge of Measuring Patient-Centered Communication
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-012-2221-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Saul J. Weiner, Alan Schwartz, Kali Cyrus, Amy Binns–Calvey, Frances M. Weaver, Gunjan Sharma, Rachel Yudkowsky |
| Abstract |
Despite wide-spread endorsement of patient-centered communication (PCC) in health care, there has been little evidence that it leads to positive change in health outcomes. The lack of correlation may be due either to an overestimation of the value of PCC or to a measurement problem. If PCC measures do not capture elements of the interaction that determine whether the resulting care plan is patient-centered, they will confound efforts to link PCC to outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Researcher | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 23% |
| Unknown | 19 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 13% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 12 | 14% |
| Unknown | 20 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 September 2012.
All research outputs
#21,420,714
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#7,217
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,408
of 172,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#46
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 172,847 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.