↓ Skip to main content

Health care for immigrants in Europe: Is there still consensus among country experts about principles of good practice? A Delphi study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2011
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 (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 Mendeley
Title
Health care for immigrants in Europe: Is there still consensus among country experts about principles of good practice? A Delphi study
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-11-699
Pubmed ID
Authors

Walter Devillé, Tim Greacen, Marija Bogic, Marie Dauvrin, Sónia Dias, Andrea Gaddini, Natasja Koitzsch Jensen, Christina Karamanidou, Ulrike Kluge, Ritva Mertaniemi, Rosa Puigpinós i Riera, Attila Sárváry, Joaquim JF Soares, Mindaugas Stankunas, Christa Straßmayr, Marta Welbel, Stefan Priebe

Abstract

European Member States are facing a challenge to provide accessible and effective health care services for immigrants. It remains unclear how best to achieve this and what characterises good practice in increasingly multicultural societies across Europe. This study assessed the views and values of professionals working in different health care contexts and in different European countries as to what constitutes good practice in health care for immigrants.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 116 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 21%
Researcher 21 18%
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 25 21%
Unknown 12 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 31%
Social Sciences 21 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 11%
Psychology 13 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 14 12%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 01 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,635,416
of 15,355,826 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,947
of 10,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,537
of 98,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,355,826 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 10,612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 98,672 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them