↓ Skip to main content

A conceptual review of engagement in healthcare and rehabilitation

Overview of attention for article published in Disability & Rehabilitation, June 2014
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
19 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
A conceptual review of engagement in healthcare and rehabilitation
Published in
Disability & Rehabilitation, June 2014
DOI 10.3109/09638288.2014.933899
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felicity A. S. Bright, Bright FA, Kayes NM, Worrall L, McPherson KM, Nicola M. Kayes, Linda Worrall, Kathryn M. McPherson

Abstract

Abstract Purpose: This review sought to develop an understanding of how engagement in healthcare has been conceptualized in the literature in order to inform future clinical practice and research in rehabilitation. A secondary purpose was to propose a working definition of engagement. Methods: EBSCO and SCOPUS databases and reference lists were searched for papers that sought to understand or describe the concept of engagement in healthcare or reported the development of a measure of engagement in healthcare. We drew on a Pragmatic Utility approach to concept analysis. Results: Thirty-one articles met the criteria and were included in the review. Engagement appeared to be conceptualized in two inter-connected ways: as a gradual process of connection between the healthcare provider and patient; and as an internal state, which may be accompanied by observable behaviors indicating engagement. Conclusion: Our review suggests engagement to be multi-dimensional, comprising both a co-constructed process and a patient state. While engagement is commonly considered a patient behavior, the review findings suggest clinicians play a pivotal role in patient engagement. This review challenges some understandings of engagement and how we work with patients and highlights conceptual limitations of some measures. Implications for Rehabilitation Engagement appears to be a multi-dimensional construct, comprising both a co-constructed process and a patient state. Conceptualizing engagement as a co-constructed process may help clinicians be more aware of their role in patient engagement and sees the responsibility to engage shift from the patient to the therapeutic dyad. Challenges in engagement may be a prompt to reflect on how the clinician is working and whether different ways of working may be beneficial.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 5%
Portugal 1 1%
Ireland 1 1%
Peru 1 1%
Unknown 78 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 28%
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Unspecified 9 11%
Other 18 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 19%
Psychology 15 18%
Unspecified 14 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 14%
Social Sciences 10 12%
Other 18 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 September 2018.
All research outputs
#1,007,627
of 12,276,356 outputs
Outputs from Disability & Rehabilitation
#121
of 1,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,323
of 196,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Disability & Rehabilitation
#2
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,276,356 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,974 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 196,919 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.