↓ Skip to main content

Clinical decision making by dentists working in the NHS General Dental Services since April 2006

Overview of attention for article published in British Dental Journal, November 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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.
Article details
Title
Clinical decision making by dentists working in the NHS General Dental Services since April 2006
Published in
British Dental Journal, November 2010
DOI 10.1038/sj.bdj.2010.1080
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In April 2006 a new contract was introduced that governed how NHS General Dental Practitioners would be funded for the services they provide. This study looks at the impact that the contract has had in the three years since its introduction, evaluating its influence on the clinical care that patients receive and the clinical decisions that dentists are making. This qualitative service evaluation involved interviewing 12 dentists representative of a range of NHS dentists involved with the new NHS dental contract using a semi-structured approach. We found evidence that the new contract has led to dentists making different decisions in their daily practice and sometimes altering their treatment plans and referral patterns to ensure that their business is not disadvantaged. Access to care for some patients without a regular dentist can be compromised by the new contract as it can be financially challenging for a dentist to accept to care for a new patient who has an unknown and potentially large need for treatment. Cherry-picking of potentially more profitable patients may be common. The incentive is to watch borderline problems rather than to treat if a treatment band threshold has already been crossed and treatment may be delayed until a later course of treatment for the same reason. Dentists often feel that complex treatments (for example, endodontic treatments) are financially unviable. Some dentists are referring difficult cases that might previously have been treated 'in house', such as extractions, to another provider, as this enables offloading of costs while potentially retaining full fees. Younger and less experienced dentists may be further pressured.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Chile 1 2%
Unknown 56 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 15 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 47%
Social Sciences 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 26%
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 01 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,203,921
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from British Dental Journal
#1,921
of 6,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,399
of 180,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Dental Journal
#10
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,028 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 180,223 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 74% of its contemporaries.