↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

A critical analysis of national policies, systems, and structures of patient empowerment in England and Greece

Overview of attention for article published in Patient preference and adherence, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
A critical analysis of national policies, systems, and structures of patient empowerment in England and Greece
Published in
Patient preference and adherence, September 2017
DOI 10.2147/ppa.s144028
Pubmed ID
Authors

Markella Boudioni, Susan McLaren, Graham Lister

Abstract

Comparison of patient empowerment (PE) policies in European countries can provide evidence for improvement and reform across different health systems. It may also influence patient and public involvement, patient experience, preference, and adherence. The objective of this study was to compare PE within national policies, systems, and structures in England and Greece for achieving integrated people-centered health services. We performed a critical search and review of policy and legislation papers in English and Greek languages. This included 1) general health policy and systems papers, 2) PE, patient and/or public involvement or patients' rights policy and legislation (1990-2015), and 3) comparative or discussion papers for England and/or Greece. A total of 102 papers on PE policies, systems, and structures were identified initially; 80 papers were included, in which 46 were policy, legislative, and discussion papers about England, 21 were policy, legislation, and discussion papers about Greece, and 13 were comparative or discussion papers including both the countries. In England, National Health Service policies emphasized patient-centered services, involvement, and empowerment, with recent focus on patients' rights; while in Greece, they emphasized patients' rights and quality of services, with recent mentions on empowerment. The health ombudsman is a very important organization across countries; however, it may be more powerful in Greece, because of the nonexistence of local mediating bodies. Micro-structures at trusts/hospitals are comparable, but legislation gives more power to the local structures in Greece. PE policies and systems have been developed and expressed differently in these countries. However, PE similarities, comparable dimensions and mechanisms, were identified. For both the countries, comparative research and these findings could be beneficial in building connections and relationships, contributing to wider European and international developments on PE, involvement, and patients' rights and further impact on patient preferences and adherence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 7 16%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Professor 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 15 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 12%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 7%
Psychology 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 15 35%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 September 2017.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,065
of 1,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,824
of 324,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#30
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 324,453 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.