↓ Skip to main content

What Is Best for Esther? Building Improvement Coaching Capacity With and for Users in Health and Social Care—A Case Study

Overview of attention for article published in Quality Management in Health Care, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 353)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
36 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
What Is Best for Esther? Building Improvement Coaching Capacity With and for Users in Health and Social Care—A Case Study
Published in
Quality Management in Health Care, January 2016
DOI 10.1097/qmh.0000000000000084
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vackerberg, Nicoline, Levander, Märta Sund, Thor, Johan

Abstract

While coaching and customer involvement can enhance the improvement of health and social care, many organizations struggle to develop their improvement capability; it is unclear how best to accomplish this. We examined one attempt at training improvement coaches. The program, set in the Esther Network for integrated care in rural Jönköping County, Sweden, included eight 1-day sessions spanning 7 months in 2011. A senior citizen joined the faculty in all training sessions. Aiming to discern which elements in the program were essential for assuming the role of improvement coach, we used a case-study design with a qualitative approach. Our focus group interviews included 17 informants: 11 coaches, 3 faculty members, and 3 senior citizens. We performed manifest content analysis of the interview data. Creating will, ideas, execution, and sustainability emerged as crucial elements. These elements were promoted by customer focus-embodied by the senior citizen trainer-shared values and a solution-focused approach, by the supportive coach network and by participants' expanded systems understanding. These elements emerged as more important than specific improvement tools and are worth considering also elsewhere when seeking to develop improvement capability in health and social care organizations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 29%
Other 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Researcher 1 14%
Librarian 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 3 43%
Arts and Humanities 1 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Engineering 1 14%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 17 August 2017.
All research outputs
#377,942
of 9,141,571 outputs
Outputs from Quality Management in Health Care
#1
of 353 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,732
of 338,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Quality Management in Health Care
#1
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,141,571 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 353 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 338,615 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.