↓ Skip to main content

GPs’ and dentists’ experiences and expectations of interprofessional collaboration: findings from a qualitative study in Germany

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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 dentists’ experiences and expectations of interprofessional collaboration: findings from a qualitative study in Germany
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12913-017-2116-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Khira Sippli, Monika A. Rieger, Fabian Huettig

Abstract

Against the background of well-described associations between oral and general health, collaboration between dentists and general practitioners (GP) is crucial to provide therapeutic and preventive patient care. However, in the German health system, GPs and dentists are organizationally separated, implying that interprofessional collaboration can only occur informally and on a voluntary basis. Given the scarce evidence of interprofessional collaboration between dentists and GPs, an explorative study was conducted. This paper outlines the findings of this study with regard to GPs' and dentists' experiences and expectations of interprofessional collaboration. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs (n = 15) and dentists (n = 13) from three structurally different regions in Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany. The interview guide included questions on occasions, expectations and experiences of interprofessional collaboration. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring. Both GPs and dentists reported perceived knowledge deficits of the other profession with regard to medication, particularly anticoagulants and bisphosphonates, as well as systemic and general respectively dental diseases. Expectations regarding the scope of collaboration diverge: whereas dentists were interested in extending collaboration, most GPs saw no need for collaboration. The perceived medical knowledge deficits of the other profession as well as divergent expectations concerning the scope of collaboration hinder profound and regular interprofessional collaboration between GPs and dentists. These perceived knowledge deficits may be rooted in the separate education of dentists and GPs in Germany. Fostering interprofessional education is a promising way to improve cooperation between GPs and dentists in the long term.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 50 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 22%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 14 27%

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 07 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,738,258
of 12,368,727 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,879
of 4,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,999
of 356,049 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#356
of 525 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,368,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,067 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 356,049 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 525 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.