↓ Skip to main content

Exploring barriers to participation and adoption of telehealth and telecare within the Whole System Demonstrator trial: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2012
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 (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
28 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
265 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
450 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
Exploring barriers to participation and adoption of telehealth and telecare within the Whole System Demonstrator trial: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-12-220
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline Sanders, Anne Rogers, Robert Bowen, Peter Bower, Shashivadan Hirani, Martin Cartwright, Ray Fitzpatrick, Martin Knapp, James Barlow, Jane Hendy, Theti Chrysanthaki, Martin Bardsley, Stanton P Newman

Abstract

Telehealth (TH) and telecare (TC) interventions are increasingly valued for supporting self-care in ageing populations; however, evaluation studies often report high rates of non-participation that are not well understood. This paper reports from a qualitative study nested within a large randomised controlled trial in the UK: the Whole System Demonstrator (WSD) project. It explores barriers to participation and adoption of TH and TC from the perspective of people who declined to participate or withdrew from the trial.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 450 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 12 3%
Canada 4 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Ireland 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 5 1%
Unknown 420 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 103 23%
Researcher 81 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 73 16%
Student > Bachelor 39 9%
Other 26 6%
Other 82 18%
Unknown 46 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 118 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 57 13%
Computer Science 49 11%
Social Sciences 49 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 26 6%
Other 81 18%
Unknown 70 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 04 December 2018.
All research outputs
#815,778
of 14,748,301 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#278
of 5,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,181
of 124,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,748,301 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 124,667 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 95% 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