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 |
Receptionist rECognition and rEferral of PaTients with Stroke (RECEPTS) study - protocol of a mixed methods study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Primary Care, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2296-15-91 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James P Sheppard, Satinder Singh, Janet Jones, Elizabeth Bates, John Skelton, Connie Wiskin, Richard J McManus, Ruth M Mellor |
| Abstract |
As the first point of contact for patients and witnesses of stroke, General Practice receptionists can be instrumental in deciding the urgency of clinical contact. Despite the considerable complexity of this task, reception staff are not clinically trained. Minimising the time taken to access thrombolysis is crucial in acute stroke as treatment must be initiated within 4.5 hours of the onset, and the earlier the better, to achieve the best outcomes. Research suggests that patients who first contact their General Practice following the onset of stroke symptoms are less likely to receive thrombolysis, in part due to significant delays within Primary Care.This study therefore aims to understand the role of General Practice receptionists, with particular interest in receptionist's ability to recognise people who may be suffering from a stroke and to handle such patients as a medical emergency. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 21% |
| Researcher | 7 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 14 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 36% |
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 15 June 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,954
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,948
of 241,837 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#49
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 241,837 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.