↓ Skip to main content

User involvement and experiential knowledge in interprofessional rehabilitation: a grounded theory study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, October 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
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
User involvement and experiential knowledge in interprofessional rehabilitation: a grounded theory study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1808-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mirela Slomic, Bjørg Christiansen, Helene L. Soberg, Unni Sveen

Abstract

User involvement is increasingly important in developing relevant health care services. The aim of this study was to contribute to a deeper understanding of user involvement and patients' experiential knowledge as recognized and incorporated into clinical practice by rehabilitation professionals. A qualitative design using a grounded theory approach was applied. Data were collected by observations of the interprofessional meetings at two rehabilitation units treating patients with traumatic brain injury and multiple trauma and by individual semi-structured interviews with rehabilitation professionals. The professionals recognized and incorporated user involvement into clinical practice as formal or authentic. Formal user involvement was sometimes considered pro forma. Incorporating patient' experiential knowledge was considered a part of authentic user involvement. Possible gaps between the patients' experiential knowledge and professional expertise were recognized. Challenges included dealing with 'artifacts', sources of information external to the patients' own experiences, and addressing the patients' possibly reduced insight due to trauma. Patients' experiential knowledge was recognized as an essential component of the professionals' knowledge base. The professionals considered user involvement and patients' experiential knowledge as part of their clinical practice. Implementation of user involvement and contribution of patients' experiential knowledge could be improved by understanding the issues raised in practice, such as possible negative consequences of user involvement in form of burdening or disempowering the patients. A better understanding of the characteristics and measures of user involvement is necessary in order to be able to offer its full benefits for both the patients and the professionals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 4 9%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Psychology 3 7%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 13 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,239,290
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,291
of 7,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,220
of 322,603 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#107
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 322,603 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.