↓ Skip to main content

GPs’ views of health policy changes: a qualitative ‘netnography’ study of UK general practice online magazine commentary

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, April 2018
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
40 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
Title
GPs’ views of health policy changes: a qualitative ‘netnography’ study of UK general practice online magazine commentary
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, April 2018
DOI 10.3399/bjgp18x696161
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Elvey, Jennifer Voorhees, Simon Bailey, Taylor Burns, Damian Hodgson

Abstract

Shifts in health policy since 2010 have brought major structural changes to the English NHS, with government stating intentions to increase GPs' autonomy and improve access to care. Meanwhile, GPs' levels of job satisfaction are low, while stress levels are high. PulseToday is a popular UK general practice online magazine that provides a key discussion forum on news relevant to general practice. To analyse readers' reactions to news stories about health policy changes published in an online general practice magazine. A qualitative 'netnography' was undertaken of readers' comments to PulseToday. METHOD: A sample of readers' comments on articles published in PulseToday was collated and subjected to thematic analysis. Around 300 comments on articles published between January 2012 and March 2016 were included in the analysis, using 'access to care' as a tracer theme. Concern about the demand and strain on general practice was perhaps to be expected. However, analysis revealed various dimensions to this concern: GPs' underlying feelings about their work and place in the NHS; constraints to GPs' control of their own working practices; a perceived loss of respect for the role of GP; and disappointment with representative bodies and GP leadership. This study shows a complex mix of resistance and resignation in general practice about the changing character of GPs' roles. This ambivalence deserves further attention because it could potentially shape responses to further change in primary care in ways that are as yet unknown.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 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 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 1 33%
Researcher 1 33%
Librarian 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 67%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 05 July 2018.
All research outputs
#376,341
of 11,863,087 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#189
of 2,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,126
of 261,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#9
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,863,087 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 2,437 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 261,096 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 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 90% of its contemporaries.