↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring and assessing the quality of care for youth: developing an audit tool using an expert consensus approach

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Mental Health Systems, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Monitoring and assessing the quality of care for youth: developing an audit tool using an expert consensus approach
Published in
International Journal of Mental Health Systems, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13033-015-0019-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefanie Puszka, Tricia Nagel, Veronica Matthews, Diana Mosca, Rebecca Piovesan, Annapurna Nori, Ross Bailie

Abstract

The mental health needs of young people are often inadequately met by health services. Quality improvement approaches provide a framework for measuring, assessing and improving the quality of healthcare. However, a lack of performance standards and measurement tools are an impediment to their implementation. This paper reports on the initial stages of development of a clinical audit tool for assessing the quality of primary healthcare for Australian Indigenous youth aged 12-24 including mental health services provided within primary care. Audit items were determined through review of relevant guidelines, expert reference group consensus opinion and specific inclusion criteria. Pilot testing was undertaken at four Indigenous primary healthcare services. A focus group discussion involving five staff from a health service participating in pilot testing explored user experiences of the tool. Audit items comprise key measures of processes and outcomes of care for Indigenous youth, as determined by the expert reference group. Gaps and conflicts in relevant guidelines and a lack of agreed performance indicators necessitated a tool development process that relied heavily on expert reference group advice and audit item inclusion criteria. Pilot testing and user feedback highlighted the importance of feasibility and context-specific considerations in tool development and design. The youth health audit tool provides a first step in monitoring, assessing and improving the way Indigenous primary healthcare services engage with and respond to the needs of youth. Our approach offers a way forward for further development of quality measures in the absence of clearly articulated standards of care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Colombia 1 2%
Unknown 50 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 19%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Researcher 7 13%
Librarian 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 13%
Psychology 5 9%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 15 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 December 2019.
All research outputs
#4,772,733
of 16,429,373 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#302
of 584 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,716
of 233,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,429,373 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 584 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 233,461 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.