↓ Skip to main content

Labelling chronic illness in primary care: a good or a bad thing?

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, December 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
31 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
Title
Labelling chronic illness in primary care: a good or a bad thing?
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, December 2004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bedson J, McCarney R, Croft P, John Bedson, Rob McCarney, Peter Croft

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 25%
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Other 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Professor 3 5%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Psychology 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 21 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 19 December 2021.
All research outputs
#1,548,312
of 20,532,457 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of General Practice
#789
of 4,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,532
of 285,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of General Practice
#24
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,532,457 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,031 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 285,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.