Automated Author ProfilePillai, Vinita
Curtin University
Pillai, Vinita
Current S-Index
Sum of Dataset Indices for all datasets
Average Dataset Index per Dataset
Average Dataset Index per dataset
Total Datasets
Total datasets for this author
Average FAIR Score
Average FAIR Score per dataset
Total Citations
Total citations to the author's datasets
Total Mentions
Total mentions of the author's datasets
S-Index Interpretation
The S-Index (Sharing Index) is a comprehensive metric that represents the cumulative impact of all your datasets. It is calculated as the sum of Dataset Index scores across all your claimed datasets.
What it means:
- A higher S-index indicates greater overall impact of your datasets relative to typical datasets in their fields of research
- The S-Index grows as you add more datasets or as existing datasets gain more citations and mentions
- It provides a single number to track your research data impact over time
Current S-Index: 4.5 (sum of 2 datasets Dataset Index scores)
More information here.
S-Index Over Time
Cumulative Citations Over Time
Cumulative Mentions Over Time
Datasets
Objective: To test the impact of feedback on the proposed management of standardised patients presenting with behavioural change with a diagnosis of dementia in Australian primary care. Materials and methods: A video vignette study was performed with Australian general practitioners (GPs) in 2013. Participants viewed six pairs of matched videos depicting people presenting changed behaviour in the context of a dementia diagnosis in two phases. In both phases GPs indicated their diagnosis and management. After phase 1, GPs were offered feedback on management strategies for the patients depicted. Analyses focused on identification of change in management between the two phases of the study. Factors impacting on the intention to coordinate care for such patients were tested in a questionnaire based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Results: Forty-five GPs completed the study. There was significant improvement in the proposed management of three of the six scenarios after the intervention. Older GPs were more likely to refer appropriately (OR=1.11 (1.01 to 1.23), p=0.04.). Overall referral to support agencies was more likely after the intervention (OR=2.52 (1.53 to 4.14), p<0.001). Older GPs were less likely to intend to coordinate care for such patients (OR=0.89 (0.81 to 0.98) p=0.02). Participants who felt confident about their ability to coordinate care were more likely to do so (OR=3.79 (1.08 to 13.32) p=0.04). Conclusions: The intervention described in this study promoted multidisciplinary management of patients with behavioural problems with a diagnosis of dementia. Increasing practitioner confidence in their ability to coordinate care may increase the proportion of GPs who will respond to patients and carers in this context. Older GPs may benefit in particular.
Authors
- Jiwa, Moyez ;
- Nichols, Pam ;
- Magin, Parker ;
- Pagey, Georgina ;
- Meng, Xingqiong ;
- Parsons, Richard ;
- Pillai, Vinita
Objective: To determine how the timing and length of hospital discharge letters impact on the number of ongoing patient problems identified by general practitioners (GPs). Trial design: GPs were randomised into four groups. Each viewed a video monologue of an actor-patient as he might present to his GP following a hospital admission with 10 problems. GPs were provided with a medical record as well as a long or short discharge letter, which was available when the video was viewed or 1 week later. GPs indicated if they would prescribe, refer or order tests for the patient's problems. Methods: Setting: Primary care. Participants: Practising Australian GPs. Intervention: A short or long hospital discharge letter enumerating patient problems. Outcome measure: Number of ongoing patient problems out of 10 identified for management by the GPs. Randomisation: 1:1 randomisation. Blinding (masking): Single-blind. Results: Numbers randomised 59 GPs. Recruitment: GPs were recruited from a network of 102 GPs across Australia. Numbers analysed 59 GPs. Outcome: GPs who received the long letter immediately were more satisfied with this information (p<0.001). Those who received the letter immediately identified significantly more health problems (p=0.001). GPs who received a short, delayed discharge letter were less satisfied than those who received a longer delayed letter (p=0.03); however, both groups who received the delayed letter identified a similar number of health problems. GPs who were older, who practised in an inner regional area or who offered more patient sessions per week identified fewer health problems (p values <0.01, <0.05 and <0.05, respectively). Harms Nil. Conclusions: Receiving information during patient consultation, as well as GP characteristics, influences the number of patient problems addressed.
Authors
- Jiwa, Moyez ;
- Meng, Xingqiong ;
- O’Shea, Carolyn ;
- Magin, Parker ;
- Dadich, Ann ;
- Pillai, Vinita