↓ Skip to main content

Conducting a team-based multi-sited focused ethnography in primary care

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2017
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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Conducting a team-based multi-sited focused ethnography in primary care
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12874-017-0422-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

A.P. Bikker, H. Atherton, H. Brant, T. Porqueddu, J.L. Campbell, A. Gibson, B. McKinstry, C. Salisbury, S. Ziebland

Abstract

Focused ethnography is an applied and pragmatic form of ethnography that explores a specific social phenomenon as it occurs in everyday life. Based on the literature a problem-focused research question is formulated before the data collection. The data generation process targets key informants and situations so that relevant results on the pre-defined topic can be obtained within a relatively short time-span. As part of a theory based evaluation of alternative forms of consultation (such as video, phone and email) in primary care we used the focused ethnographic method in a multisite study in general practice across the UK. To date there is a gap in the literature on using focused ethnography in healthcare research.The aim of the paper is to build on the various methodological approaches in health services research by presenting the challenges and benefits we encountered whilst conducing a focused ethnography in British primary care. Our considerations are clustered under three headings: constructing a shared understanding, dividing the tasks within the team, and the functioning of the focused ethnographers within the broader multi-disciplinary team.As a result of using this approach we experienced several advantages, like the ability to collect focused data in several settings simultaneously within in a short time-span. Also, the sharing of experiences and interpretations between the researchers contributed to a more holistic understanding of the research topic. However, mechanisms need to be in place to facilitate and synthesise the observations, guide the analysis, and to ensure that all researchers feel engaged. Reflection, trust and flexibility among the team members were crucial to successfully adopt a team focused ethnographic approach. When used for policy focussed applied healthcare research a team-based multi-sited focused ethnography can uncover practices and understandings that would not be apparent through surveys or interviews alone. If conducted with care, it can provide timely findings within the fast moving context of healthcare policy and research.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Researcher 5 9%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 21%
Social Sciences 10 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Psychology 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 12 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 18 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,182,223
of 11,788,552 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#178
of 1,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,095
of 265,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#5
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,788,552 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 265,533 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 82% 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 done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.