| Title |
Patient health information materials in waiting rooms of family physicians: do patients care?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s45777 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tania Moerenhout, Liesbeth Borgermans, Sandrina Schol, Johan Vansintejan, Erwin Van De Vijver, Dirk Devroey |
| Abstract |
Patient health information materials (PHIMs), such as leaflets and posters are widely used by family physicians to reinforce or illustrate information, and to remind people of information received previously. This facilitates improved health-related knowledge and self-management by patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Italy | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Ghana | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 18% |
| Researcher | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 17 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 16% |
| Psychology | 6 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 July 2013.
All research outputs
#7,256,868
of 25,540,105 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#498
of 1,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,904
of 206,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#11
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,540,105 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 206,838 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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 59% of its contemporaries.