↓ Skip to main content

Integrated Clinical Decision Support Systems Promote Absolute Cardiovascular Risk Assessment: An Important Primary Prevention Measure in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Integrated Clinical Decision Support Systems Promote Absolute Cardiovascular Risk Assessment: An Important Primary Prevention Measure in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Veronica Matthews, Christopher P. Burgess, Christine Connors, Elizabeth Moore, David Peiris, David Scrimgeour, Sandra C. Thompson, Sarah Larkins, Ross Bailie

Abstract

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians experience a greater burden of disease compared to non-Indigenous Australians. Around one-fifth of the health disparity is caused by cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite the importance of absolute cardiovascular risk assessment (CVRA) as a screening and early intervention tool, few studies have reported its use within the Australian Indigenous primary health care (PHC) sector. This study utilizes data from a large-scale quality improvement program to examine variation in documented CVRA as a primary prevention strategy for individuals without prior CVD across four Australian jurisdictions. We also examine the proportion with elevated risk and follow-up actions recorded. We undertook cross-sectional analysis of 2,052 client records from 97 PHC centers to assess CVRA in Indigenous adults aged ≥20 years with no recorded chronic disease diagnosis (2012-2014). Multilevel regression was used to quantify the variation in CVRA attributable to health center and client level factors. The main outcome measure was the proportion of eligible adults who had CVRA recorded. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of clients with elevated risk that had follow-up actions recorded. Approximately 23% (n = 478) of eligible clients had documented CVRA. Almost all assessments (99%) were conducted in the Northern Territory. Within this jurisdiction, there was wide variation between centers in the proportion of clients with documented CVRA (median 38%; range 0-86%). Regression analysis showed health center factors accounted for 48% of the variation. Centers with integrated clinical decision support systems were more likely to document CVRA (OR 21.1; 95% CI 5.4-82.4; p < 0.001). Eleven percent (n = 53) of clients were found with moderate/high CVD risk, of whom almost one-third were under 35 years (n = 16). Documentation of follow-up varied with respect to the targeted risk factor. Fewer than 30% with abnormal blood lipid or glucose levels had follow-up management plans recorded. There was wide variation in CVRA between jurisdictions and between PHC centers. Learnings from successful interventions to educate and support centers in CVRA provision should be shared with stakeholders more widely. Where risk has been identified, further improvement in follow-up management is required to prevent CVD onset and reduce future burden in Australia's Indigenous population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Other 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 17 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 20 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 October 2017.
All research outputs
#8,682,152
of 25,729,842 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#3,654
of 14,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,829
of 324,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#44
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,729,842 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,395 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 324,587 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 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.