↓ Skip to main content

Which positive factors determine the GP satisfaction in clinical practice? A systematic literature review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
Which positive factors determine the GP satisfaction in clinical practice? A systematic literature review
Published in
BMC Family Practice, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12875-016-0524-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

B. Le Floch, H. Bastiaens, J. Y. Le Reste, H. Lingner, R. D. Hoffman, S. Czachowski, R. Assenova, T. H. Koskela, Z. Klemenc-Ketis, P. Nabbe, A. Sowinska, T. Montier, L. Peremans

Abstract

Looking at what makes General Practitioners (GPs) happy in their profession, may be important in increasing the GP workforce in the future. The European General Practice Research Network (EGPRN) created a research team (eight national groups) in order to clarify the factors involved in GP job satisfaction throughout Europe. The first step of this study was a literature review to explore how the satisfaction of GPs had been studied before. The research question was "Which factors are related to GP satisfaction in Clinical Practice?" Systematic literature review according to the PRISMA statement. The databases searched were Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane. All articles were identified, screened and included by two separate research teams, according to inclusion or exclusion criteria. Then, a qualitative appraisal was undertaken. Next, a thematic analysis process was undertaken to capture any issue relevant to the research question. The number of records screened was 458. One hundred four were eligible. Finally, 17 articles were included. The data revealed 13 subthemes, which were grouped into three major themes for GP satisfaction. First there were general profession-related themes, applicable to many professions. A second group of issues related specifically to a GP setting. Finally, a third group was related to professional life and personal issues. A number of factors leading to GP job satisfaction, exist in literature They should be used by policy makers within Europe to increase the GP workforce. The research team needs to undertake qualitative studies to confirm or enhance those results.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Researcher 5 7%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 14 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Psychology 5 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 17 24%

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 26 September 2016.
All research outputs
#4,506,219
of 8,435,952 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#708
of 1,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,339
of 252,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,435,952 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 252,952 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.