↓ Skip to main content

Drugs, distrust and dialogue –a focus group study with Swedish GPs on discharge summary use in primary care

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Drugs, distrust and dialogue –a focus group study with Swedish GPs on discharge summary use in primary care
Published in
BMC Family Practice, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12875-018-0804-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriella Caleres, Eva Lena Strandberg, Åsa Bondesson, Patrik Midlöv, Sara Modig

Abstract

Discharge summary with medication report effectively counteracts drug-related problems due to insufficient information transfer in care transitions. The benefits of the discharge summary may be lost if it is not adequately used, and factors affecting optimal use by the GP are of interest. Since the views of Swedish GPs are unexplored, this study aimed to explore and understand GPs experiences, perceptions and feelings regarding the use of the discharge summary with medication report. This qualitative study was based on four focus group discussion with 18 GPs and resident physicians in family medicine which were performed in 2016 and 2017. A semi-structured interview guide was used. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using qualitative content analysis. The analysis resulted in three final main themes: "Importance of the discharge summary", "Role of the GP" and "Create dialogue" with six categories; "Benefits for the GP and perceived benefits for the patient", "GP use of the information", "Significance of different documents", "Spider in the web", "Terminus/End station" and "Improved information transfer in care transitions". Overall, the participants described clear benefits with the discharge summary when accurate although perceived deficiencies were also quite rife. The GPs experiences and views of the discharge summary revealed clear benefits regarding mainly medication information, awareness of any plans as well as shared knowledge with the patient. However, perceived deficiencies of the discharge summary affected its use by the GP and enhanced communication was called for.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 14%
Other 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Unknown 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 64%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Unspecified 1 7%
Unknown 3 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,622,599
of 13,309,886 outputs
Outputs from BMC Family Practice
#820
of 1,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,018
of 268,514 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Family Practice
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,309,886 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,329 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 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 268,514 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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