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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Between “the best way to deliver patient care” and “chaos and low clinical value”: General Practitioners’ and Practice Managers’ views on data sharing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Medical Informatics, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2017.05.009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mila Petrova, Matthew Barclay, Sam S. Barclay, Stephen I.G. Barclay |
| Abstract |
In the UK, General Practitioners and Practice Managers are key to enabling health information exchange (typically referred to as 'data sharing'). This study aimed to survey GPs and PMs for familiarity, engagement with and perceptions of patient data sharing. Cross-sectional survey. All 107 general practices in England's second largest Clinical Commissioning Group, Cambridgeshire & Peterborough CCG. Descriptive statistics; hierarchical logistic regression; thematic analysis. 405 (64%) responses were received - from 338 (62%) GPs and 67 (71%) PMs. Familiarity and engagement were highest for local frail elderly and end of life care projects (>76% had used). The greatest difference in use concerned the now suspended national care.data initiative: PMs had odds of reporting use 75 times higher than GP partners (95% CI 27-211). Patient confusion was the most pronounced challenge and improved coordination the most pronounced expected benefit. Frequency of discussions with patients varied with IT competence (OR 4.2 for most competent users relative to least, 95% CI 1.7-10.7) and clinical system (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.5). Patient reservations were reported more frequently by respondents who rated their IT competence as highest (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.5-7.6), perceived more data sharing challenges (OR for a 1-point increase in challenges perception score 3.4, 95% CI 2.1-5.6) and by PMs (relative to GP partners, OR 18.0, 95% CI 7.9-41.3). Familiarity with and use of data sharing projects was high among GPs and PMs. Both their individual and organisational characteristics were associated with the reported frequency of discussions and patients' responses. Improved awareness of the impact of provider characteristics and attitudes on patients' decisions about data sharing may enhance the equity and autonomy of those decisions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 104 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 13% |
| Researcher | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 32 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 13% |
| Computer Science | 13 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 11% |
| Engineering | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 32 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 June 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Medical Informatics
#1,536
of 1,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,772
of 327,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Medical Informatics
#28
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 327,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.