↓ Skip to main content

Patients’ anticipated actions following transient ischaemic attack symptoms: a qualitative vignette-based study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Patients’ anticipated actions following transient ischaemic attack symptoms: a qualitative vignette-based study
Published in
BMC Family Practice, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12875-017-0594-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Parker Magin, Terry Joyce, Christopher Levi, Daniel Lasserson

Abstract

Transient Ischaemic Attack (TIA) requires urgent investigation and management. Urgent management reduces the risk of subsequent stroke markedly, but non-presentation or delays in patient presentation to health services have been found to compromise timely management. We aimed to explore general practice patients' anticipated responses to TIA symptoms. This was a qualitative study employing semi-structured telephone interviews. Participants were recruited from respondents in an earlier quantitative study based in Australian general practices. Maximum variation purposive sampling of patients from that study (on the basis of age, rurality, gender and previous experience of stroke/TIA) continued until thematic saturation was achieved. After initial interviews explored knowledge of TIA and potential responses, subsequent interviews further explored anticipated responses via clinical vignettes containing TIA and non-TIA symptoms. Transcribed interviews were coded independently by two researchers. Data collection and analysis were concurrent and cumulative, using a process of iterative thematic analysis and constant comparison. A schema explaining participants' anticipated actions emerged during this process and was iteratively tested in later interviews. Thirty-seven interviews were conducted and a 'spectrum of action', from watchful waiting (only responding if symptoms recurred) to summoning an ambulance immediately, was established. Intermediate actions upon the spectrum were: intending to mention the episode to a general practitioner (GP) at a routine appointment; consulting a GP non-urgently; consulting a general practitioner (GP) urgently; and attending an Emergency Department urgently. The substrate for decision-making relating to this spectrum operated via three constructs: the 'individual set' of the participant (their inherent disposition towards action in response to health matters in general), their 'discriminatory power' (the ability to discriminate TIA symptoms from non-TIA symptoms) and their 'effective access' to health-care services. Policies to improve patients' accessing care (and accessing care urgently) post-TIA should address these three determinants of anticipated action.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Master 6 12%
Other 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 22%
Psychology 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 15 31%

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 25 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,091,622
of 12,050,803 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#536
of 1,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,551
of 328,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#16
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,050,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,192 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 328,049 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.