↓ Skip to main content

Patient experience of NHS health checks: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
32 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 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
Patient experience of NHS health checks: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis
Published in
BMJ Open, August 2017
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017169
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juliet A Usher-Smith, Emma Harte, Calum MacLure, Adam Martin, Catherine L Saunders, Catherine Meads, Fiona M Walter, Simon J Griffin, Jonathan Mant

Abstract

To review the experiences of patients attending NHS Health Checks in England. A systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies with a thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. An electronic literature search of Medline, Embase, Health Management Information Consortium, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, PsycInfo, Web of Science, OpenGrey, the Cochrane Library, National Health Service (NHS) Evidence, Google Scholar, Google, Clinical Trials.gov and the ISRCTN registry to 09/11/16 with no language restriction and manual screening of reference lists of all included papers. Primary research reporting experiences of patients who have attended NHS Health Checks. 20 studies met the inclusion criteria, 9 reporting quantitative data and 15 qualitative data. There were consistently high levels of reported satisfaction in surveys, with over 80% feeling that they had benefited from an NHS Health Check. Data from qualitative studies showed that the NHS Health Check had been perceived to act as a wake-up call for many who reported having gone on to make substantial lifestyle changes which they attributed to the NHS Health Check. However, some had been left with a feeling of unmet expectations, were confused about or unable to remember their risk scores, found the lifestyle advice too simplistic and non-personalised or were confused about follow-up. While participants were generally very supportive of the NHS Health Check programme and examples of behaviour change were reported, there are a number of areas where improvements could be made. These include greater clarity around the aims of the programme within the promotional material, more proactive support for lifestyle change and greater appreciation of the challenges of communicating risk and the limitations of relying on the risk score alone as a trigger for facilitating behaviour change.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 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 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 13 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 32 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 15%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Psychology 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 38 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 31. 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 28 September 2023.
All research outputs
#1,288,443
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#2,319
of 25,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,493
of 328,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#69
of 642 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,788 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 328,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 642 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.