↓ 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
230 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
400 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 400 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 370 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 96 24%
Researcher 70 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 66 17%
Student > Bachelor 34 9%
Other 23 6%
Other 74 19%
Unknown 37 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 112 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 52 13%
Computer Science 47 12%
Social Sciences 43 11%
Psychology 22 6%
Other 68 17%
Unknown 56 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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
#721,281
of 13,976,728 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#237
of 4,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,742
of 123,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,976,728 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 4,717 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. 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 123,211 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