↓ Skip to main content

Patients’ views on interactions with practitioners for type 2 diabetes: a longitudinal qualitative study in primary care over 10 years

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, December 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 (89th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Patients’ views on interactions with practitioners for type 2 diabetes: a longitudinal qualitative study in primary care over 10 years
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, December 2017
DOI 10.3399/bjgp17x693917
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hajira Dambha-Miller, Barbora Silarova, Greg Irving, Ann Louise Kinmonth, Simon J Griffin

Abstract

It has been suggested that interactions between patients and practitioners in primary care have the potential to delay progression of complications in type 2 diabetes. However, as primary care faces greater pressures, patient experiences of patient-practitioner interactions might be changing. To explore the views of patients with type 2 diabetes on factors that are of significance to them in patient-practitioner interactions in primary care after diagnosis, and over the last 10 years of living with the disease. A longitudinal qualitative analysis over 10 years in UK primary care. The study was part of a qualitative and quantitative examination of patient experience within the existing ADDITION-Cambridge and ADDITION-Plus trials from 2002 to 2016. The researchers conducted a qualitative descriptive analysis of free-text comments to an open-ended question within the CARE measure questionnaire at 1 and 10 years after diagnosis with diabetes. Data were analysed cross-sectionally at each time point, and at an individual level moving both backwards and forwards between time points to describe emergent topics. At the 1-year follow-up, 311 out of 1106 (28%) participants had commented; 101 out of 380 (27%) participants commented at 10-year follow-up; and 46 participants commented at both times. Comments on preferences for face-to-face contact, more time with practitioners, and relational continuity of care were more common over time. This study highlights issues related to the wider context of interactions between patients and practitioners in the healthcare system over the last 10 years since diagnosis. Paradoxically, these same aspects of care that are valued over time from diagnosis are also increasingly unprotected in UK primary care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 13%
Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Master 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 25%
Psychology 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 23 March 2018.
All research outputs
#881,124
of 13,458,925 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#478
of 2,903 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,193
of 387,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#22
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,458,925 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,903 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 387,836 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.