↓ Skip to main content

The impact of Public Reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
26 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
The impact of Public Reporting on clinical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1543-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paolo Campanella, Vladimir Vukovic, Paolo Parente, Adela Sulejmani, Walter Ricciardi, Maria Lucia Specchia

Abstract

To assess both qualitatively and quantitatively the impact of Public Reporting (PR) on clinical outcomes, we carried out a systematic review of published studies on this topic. Pubmed, Web of Science and SCOPUS databases were searched to identify studies published from 1991 to 2014 that investigated the relationship between PR and clinical outcomes. Studies were considered eligible if they investigated the relationship between PR and clinical outcomes and comprehensively described the PR mechanism and the study design adopted. Among the clinical outcomes identified, meta-analysis was performed for overall mortality rate which quantitative data were exhaustively reported in a sufficient number of studies. Two reviewers conducted all data extraction independently and disagreements were resolved through discussion. The same reviewers evaluated also the quality of the studies using a GRADE approach. Twenty-seven studies were included. Mainly, the effect of PR on clinical outcomes was positive. Meta-analysis regarding overall mortality included, in a context of high heterogeneity, 10 studies with a total of 1,840,401 experimental events and 3,670,446 control events and resulted in a RR of 0.85 (95 % CI, 0.79-0.92). The introduction of PR programs at different levels of the healthcare sector is a challenging but rewarding public health strategy. Existing research covering different clinical outcomes supports the idea that PR could, in fact, stimulate providers to improve healthcare quality.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 19%
Researcher 15 18%
Other 13 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 16 19%
Unknown 11 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 7%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 5%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 20 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 18 March 2019.
All research outputs
#544,132
of 15,918,484 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#123
of 5,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,323
of 266,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,918,484 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,491 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 97% 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 266,542 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 21 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 95% of its contemporaries.