↓ Skip to main content

Mapping South African allied health primary care clinical guideline activity: establishing a stakeholder reference sample

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Mapping South African allied health primary care clinical guideline activity: establishing a stakeholder reference sample
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12961-016-0145-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janine Margarita Dizon, Karen Grimmer, Shingai Machingaidze, Pam McLaren, Quinette Louw

Abstract

Little is known about allied health (AH) clinical practice guideline (CPG) activity in South Africa, and particularly in relation to primary health care (PHC). This paper reports on a scoping study undertaken to establish a reference framework, from which a comprehensive maximum variation sample could be selected. This was required to underpin robust sampling for a qualitative study aimed at understanding South African primary care AH therapy CPG activities. This paper builds on findings from the South African Guidelines Evaluation (Project SAGE) Flagship grant. South African government websites were searched for structures of departments and portfolios, and available CPGs. Professional AH association websites were searched for CPGs, purposively-identified key informants were interviewed, and CPGs previously identified for priority South African primary care conditions were critiqued for AH therapy involvement. Key informants described potentially complex relationships between players who may be engaged in South African AH CPGs, in both public and private sectors. There were disability/rehabilitation portfolios at national and provincial governments, but no uniformity in provincial government organisation of, or support for, PHC AH services. There were no AH primary care therapy CPGs on government websites, although there was 'clinical guidance' in various forms on professional association websites. Only two CPGs of priority South African PHC conditions included mention of any AH therapy (physiotherapy for adult asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). A comprehensive and wide-reaching stakeholder reference framework would be required in order to capture the heterogeneity of AH primary care CPG activity in South Africa. This should involve the voices of national and purposively-selected provincial governments, academic institutions, consultants, public sector managers and clinicians, private practitioners, professional associations, and private sector insurers. Provincial governments should be selected to reflect heterogeneity in local economics, population demographics and availability of university AH training programs. This investigation should aim to determine the areas of PHC in which AH are engaged.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 73 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Researcher 13 18%
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 12%
Other 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 11 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 24 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 23%
Social Sciences 7 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 7%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 13 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 October 2016.
All research outputs
#4,354,696
of 8,594,027 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#426
of 500 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,112
of 254,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#12
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,594,027 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 500 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 254,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.