↓ Skip to main content

Study Protocol: establishing good relationships between patients and health care providers while providing cardiac care. Exploring how patient-clinician engagement contributes to health disparities…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Study Protocol: establishing good relationships between patients and health care providers while providing cardiac care. Exploring how patient-clinician engagement contributes to health disparities between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians in South Australia
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-397
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yvette L Roe, Christopher J Zeitz, Bronwyn Fredericks

Abstract

Studies that compare Indigenous Australian and non-Indigenous patients who experience a cardiac event or chest pain are inconclusive about the reasons for the differences in-hospital and survival rates. The advances in diagnostic accuracy, medication and specialised workforce has contributed to a lower case fatality and lengthen survival rates however this is not evident in the Indigenous Australian population. A possible driver contributing to this disparity may be the impact of patient-clinician interface during key interactions during the health care process.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Australia 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 39 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 21%
Researcher 7 16%
Librarian 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 33%
Social Sciences 8 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 9 21%

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 12 January 2015.
All research outputs
#6,278,398
of 12,372,945 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,982
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,377
of 146,936 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#17
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 146,936 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.