↓ Skip to main content

Implementing new care models: learning from the Greater Manchester demonstrator pilot experience

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Family Practice, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

7 tweeters

Readers on

31 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.
Implementing new care models: learning from the Greater Manchester demonstrator pilot experience
Published in
BMC Family Practice, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0773-y
Pubmed ID

Rebecca Elvey, Simon Bailey, Kath Checkland, Anne McBride, Stephen Parkin, Katy Rothwell, Damian Hodgson


Current health policy focuses on improving accessibility, increasing integration and shifting resources from hospitals to community and primary care. Initiatives aimed at achieving these policy aims have supported the implementation of various 'new models of care', including general practice offering 'additional availability' appointments during evenings and at weekends. In Greater Manchester, six 'demonstrator sites' were funded: four sites delivered additional availability appointments, other services included case management and rapid response. The aim of this paper is to explore the factors influencing the implementation of services within a programme designed to improve access to primary care. The paper consists of a qualitative process evaluation undertaken within provider organisations, including general practices, hospitals and care homes. Semi-structured interviews, with the data subjected to thematic analysis. Ninety-one people participated in interviews. Six key factors were identified as important for the establishment and running of the demonstrators: information technology; information governance; workforce and organisational development; communications and engagement; supporting infrastructure; federations and alliances. These factors brought to light challenges in the attempt to provide new or modify existing services. Underpinning all factors was the issue of trust; there was consensus amongst our participants that trusting relationships, particularly between general practices, were vital for collaboration. It was also crucial that general practices trusted in the integrity of anyone external who was to work with the practice, particularly if they were to access data on the practice computer system. A dialogical approach was required, which enabled staff to see themselves as active rather than passive participants. The research highlights various challenges presented by the context within which extended access is implemented. Trust was the fundamental underlying issue; there was consensus amongst participants that trusting relationships were vital for effective collaboration in primary care.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 26%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 16%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 8 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 12 39%

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 03 July 2018.
All research outputs
of 14,262,606 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
of 1,449 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 273,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,262,606 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,449 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 273,868 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them