↓ Skip to main content

‘Who does this patient belong to?’ boundary work and the re/making of (NSTEMI) heart attack patients

Overview of attention for article published in Sociology of Health & Illness, June 2018
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
‘Who does this patient belong to?’ boundary work and the re/making of (NSTEMI) heart attack patients
Published in
Sociology of Health & Illness, June 2018
DOI 10.1111/1467-9566.12778
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen Cramer, Jacki Hughes, Rachel Johnson, Maggie Evans, Christi Deaton, Adam Timmis, Harry Hemingway, Gene Feder, Katie Featherstone

Abstract

This ethnography within ten English and Welsh hospitals explores the significance of boundary work and the impacts of this work on the quality of care experienced by heart attack patients who have suspected non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) /non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Beginning with the initial identification and prioritisation of patients, boundary work informed negotiations over responsibility for patients, their transfer and admission to different wards, and their access to specific domains in order to receive diagnostic tests and treatment. In order to navigate boundaries successfully and for their clinical needs to be more easily recognised by staff, a patient needed to become a stable boundary object. Ongoing uncertainty in fixing their clinical classification, was a key reason why many NSTEMI patients faltered as boundary objects. Viewing NSTEMI patients as boundary objects helps to articulate the critical and ongoing process of classification and categorisation in the creation and maintenance of boundary objects. We show the essential, but hidden, role of boundary actors in making and re-making patients into boundary objects. Physical location was critical and the parallel processes of exclusion and restriction of boundary object status can lead to marginalisation of some patients and inequalities of care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 4 6%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 19 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 13 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 10%
Psychology 3 5%
Arts and Humanities 3 5%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 18 29%
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 12 September 2019.
All research outputs
#1,738,825
of 24,486,486 outputs
Outputs from Sociology of Health & Illness
#344
of 2,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,686
of 334,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sociology of Health & Illness
#7
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,486,486 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 2,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. 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 334,103 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 35 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.