↓ Skip to main content

Self-monitoring in hypertension: a web-based survey of primary care physicians

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Human Hypertension, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Self-monitoring in hypertension: a web-based survey of primary care physicians
Published in
Journal of Human Hypertension, July 2013
DOI 10.1038/jhh.2013.54
Pubmed ID
Authors

R J McManus, S Wood, E P Bray, P Glasziou, A Hayen, C Heneghan, J Mant, P Padfield, J F Potter, F D R Hobbs

Abstract

Although self-monitoring of blood pressure is common among people with hypertension, little is known about how general practitioners (GPs) use such readings. This survey aimed to ascertain current views and practice on self-monitoring of UK primary care physicians. An internet-based survey of UK GPs was undertaken using a provider of internet services to UK doctors. The hyperlink to the survey was opened by 928 doctors, and 625 (67%) GPs completed the questionnaire. Of them, 557 (90%) reported having patients who self-monitor, 191 (34%) had a monitor that they lend to patients, 171 (31%) provided training in self-monitoring for their patients and 52 (9%) offered training to other GPs. Three hundred and sixty-seven GPs (66%) recommended at least two readings per day, and 416 (75%) recommended at least 4 days of monitoring at a time. One hundred and eighty (32%) adjusted self-monitored readings to take account of lower pressures in out-of-office settings, and 10/5 mm Hg was the most common adjustment factor used. Self-monitoring of blood pressure was widespread among the patients of responding GPs. Although the majority used appropriate schedules of measurement, some GPs suggested much more frequent home measurements than usual. Further, interpretation of home blood pressure was suboptimal, with only a minority recognising that values for diagnosis and on-treatment target are lower than those for clinic measurement. Subsequent national guidance may improve this situation but will require adequate implementation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 55 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 21%
Student > Master 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Psychology 6 11%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 11 19%
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 16 May 2020.
All research outputs
#6,046,430
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Human Hypertension
#534
of 1,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,842
of 194,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Human Hypertension
#8
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,364 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 194,350 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 52% of its contemporaries.