↓ Skip to main content

Receptionist rECognition and rEferral of Patients with Stroke (RECEPTS): unannounced simulated patient telephone call study in primary care

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, June 2015
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Receptionist rECognition and rEferral of Patients with Stroke (RECEPTS): unannounced simulated patient telephone call study in primary care
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, June 2015
DOI 10.3399/bjgp15x685621
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruth M Mellor, James P Sheppard, Elizabeth Bates, George Bouliotis, Janet Jones, Satinder Singh, John Skelton, Connie Wiskin, Richard J McManus

Abstract

Stroke is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Timely recognition and referral are essential for treatment. To examine the ability of receptionists in general practices to recognise symptoms of stroke and direct patients to emergency care. Unannounced simulated patient telephone calls and prospective cross-sectional survey study in general practices in the Birmingham and Solihull area. A total of 52 general practices participated in a total of 520 simulated telephone calls, with 183 receptionists completing questionnaires. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine likelihood of referral for immediate care by ease of vignette recognition and number of common stroke symptoms present. General practice receptionists correctly referred 69% of simulated calls for immediate care. Calls classed as 'difficult' to recognise were less likely to be immediately referred. Compared with 'easy' calls: 'difficult' calls odds ratio (OR) 0.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.08 to 0.26; 'moderate' calls OR 0.55, 95% CI = 0.32 to 0.92. Similarly, calls including one or two 'FAST' symptoms were less likely to be referred immediately (compared with three FAST symptoms: one symptom OR 0.30, 95% CI = 0.13 to 0.72; two symptoms OR 0.35, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.83). General practice receptionists refer patients with stroke for immediate care when they present with several symptoms; however, they are less likely to refer patients presenting with only one symptom or less common symptoms of stroke. Optimum management of acute stroke in primary care requires interventions that improve receptionists' knowledge of lesser-known stroke symptoms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

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

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 16%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Other 5 10%
Librarian 3 6%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 13 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 24 October 2016.
All research outputs
#1,635,807
of 23,149,216 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#824
of 4,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,770
of 263,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#11
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,149,216 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 263,827 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.