↓ Skip to main content

Self-Management Support to People with Type 2 Diabetes - A comparative study of Kaiser Permanente and the Danish Healthcare System

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Self-Management Support to People with Type 2 Diabetes - A comparative study of Kaiser Permanente and the Danish Healthcare System
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-160
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michaela Schiøtz, Martin Strandberg-Larsen, Anne Frølich, Allan Krasnik, Jim Bellows, Jette K Kristensen, Peter Vedsted, Peter Eskildsen, Henning Beck-Nielsen, John Hsu

Abstract

Self-management support is considered to be an essential part of diabetes care. However, the implementation of self-management support within healthcare settings has appeared to be challenging and there is increased interest in "real world" best practice examples to guide policy efforts. In order to explore how different approaches to diabetes care and differences in management structure influence the provision of SMS we selected two healthcare systems that have shown to be comparable in terms of budget, benefits and entitlements. We compared the extent of SMS provided and the self-management behaviors of people living with diabetes in Kaiser Permanente (KP) and the Danish Healthcare System (DHS).

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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 66 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 30%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 33%
Social Sciences 9 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 9%
Psychology 5 7%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 6 9%

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 26 September 2012.
All research outputs
#6,707,022
of 12,372,945 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,287
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,411
of 120,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#25
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,083 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 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 120,360 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.