| Title |
Exploring the information needs of patients with unexplained chest pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s47120 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ingrid Ølfarnes Røysland, Elin Dysvik, Bodil Furnes, Febe Friberg |
| Abstract |
Unexplained chest pain is a common condition. Despite negative findings, a large number of these patients will continue to suffer from chest pain after being investigated at cardiac outpatient clinics. Unexplained chest pain covers many possible complaints, and diagnosing a single cause for a patient's pain is often described as difficult, as there are a number of possible factors that can contribute to the condition. For health professionals to meet patients' expectations, they must know more about the information needs of patients with unexplained chest pain. The aim of this study was to describe information needs among patients with unexplained chest pain and how those needs were met by health professionals during medical consultations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 38 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 17% |
| Librarian | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Psychology | 2 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 12% |
| Unknown | 5 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 September 2013.
All research outputs
#20,266,762
of 25,774,185 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,301
of 1,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,062
of 213,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#27
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,774,185 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 213,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.