↓ Skip to main content

GPs’ and child and adolescent psychiatry specialists’ experiences of joint consultations in the GP’s office: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
GPs’ and child and adolescent psychiatry specialists’ experiences of joint consultations in the GP’s office: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Research Notes, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2766-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tori Guldahl Seierstad, Mette Brekke, Ingun Toftemo, Ole Rikard Haavet

Abstract

The study is an exploration of a joint consultation model, a collaboration between general practitioners (GPs) and specialists from child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) in Lillehammer, Norway. A qualitative study based on two focus group interviews, one with participating GPs and one with participating specialists from the local CAMHS. Participants were five GPs, with work experience varying from 6 months to 20 years (four of them specialists in general medicine) and two CAMHS specialists-a psychiatrist and a psychologist-both with more than 20 years of experience. The focus group discussions revealed that both GPs and CAMHS specialists saw the joint consultations as a good teaching method for improving GPs' skills in child and adolescent psychiatry. Both groups believed that this low-threshold service benefits the patients and that the joint consultation is especially suited to sort problems and determine the level of help required. The GPs and CAMHS specialists shared the impression that the collaboration model is beneficial for both patients and health care providers. Close collaboration with primary health care is recommended in the guidelines for child and adolescent psychiatry outpatient clinics. We suggest that the joint consultation model could be a good way for GPs and CAMHS specialists to collaborate.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 23%
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 8 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 29%
Psychology 9 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 6%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 October 2017.
All research outputs
#13,333,847
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,639
of 4,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,813
of 315,659 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#39
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 315,659 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 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 65% of its contemporaries.