↓ Skip to main content

Instruments to measure patient experience of health care quality in hospitals: a systematic review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 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
Instruments to measure patient experience of health care quality in hospitals: a systematic review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/2046-4053-3-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michelle Beattie, William Lauder, Iain Atherton, Douglas J Murphy

Abstract

Improving and sustaining the quality of care in hospitals is an intractable and persistent challenge. The patients' experience of the quality of hospital care can provide insightful feedback to enable clinical teams to direct quality improvement efforts in areas where they are most needed. Yet, patient experience is often marginalised in favour of aspects of care that are easier to quantify (for example, waiting time). Attempts to measure patient experience have been hindered by a proliferation of instruments using various outcome measures with varying degrees of psychometric development and testing.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Colombia 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 154 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 19%
Researcher 18 11%
Student > Postgraduate 15 9%
Other 12 7%
Other 37 23%
Unknown 14 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 15%
Social Sciences 21 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 11 7%
Psychology 8 5%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 19 12%

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 04 May 2019.
All research outputs
#3,882,101
of 14,854,534 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#731
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,158
of 259,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#39
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,854,534 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 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 259,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 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 50% of its contemporaries.