↓ Skip to main content

Defining Team Effort Involved in Patient Care from the Primary Care Physician’s Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
181 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
Defining Team Effort Involved in Patient Care from the Primary Care Physician’s Perspective
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11606-016-3897-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew S. Hwang, Steven J. Atlas, Johan Hong, Jeffrey M. Ashburner, Adrian H. Zai, Richard W. Grant, Clemens S. Hong

Abstract

A better understanding of the attributes of patients who require more effort to manage may improve risk adjustment approaches and lead to more efficient resource allocation, improved patient care and health outcomes, and reduced burnout in primary care clinicians. To identify and characterize high-effort patients from the physician's perspective. Cohort study. Ninety-nine primary care physicians in an academic primary care network. From a list of 100 randomly selected patients in their panels, PCPs identified patients who required a high level of team-based effort and patients they considered complex. For high-effort patients, PCPs indicated which factors influenced their decision: medical/care coordination, behavioral health, and/or socioeconomic factors. We examined differences in patient characteristics based on PCP-defined effort and complexity. Among 9594 eligible patients, PCPs classified 2277 (23.7 %) as high-effort and 2676 (27.9 %) as complex. Behavioral health issues were the major driver of effort in younger patients, while medical/care coordination issues predominated in older patients. Compared to low-effort patients, high-effort patients were significantly (P < 0.01 for all) more likely to have higher rates of medical (e.g. 23.2 % vs. 6.3 % for diabetes) and behavioral health problems (e.g. 9.8 % vs. 2.9 % for substance use disorder), more frequent primary care visits (10.9 vs. 6.0 visits), and higher acute care utilization rates (25.8 % vs. 7.7 % for emergency department [ED] visits and 15.0 % vs. 3.9 % for hospitalization). Almost one in five (18 %) patients who were considered high-effort were not deemed complex by the same PCPs. Patients defined as high-effort by their primary care physicians, not all of whom were medically complex, appear to have a high burden of psychosocial issues that may not be accounted for in current chronic disease-focused risk adjustment approaches.

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 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Unknown 178 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 15%
Researcher 24 13%
Student > Bachelor 21 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 11%
Other 9 5%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 57 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 20%
Psychology 20 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 9%
Social Sciences 13 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 68 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 April 2018.
All research outputs
#6,388,035
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,570
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,700
of 319,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#43
of 84 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
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 54% 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 319,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 84 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.