↓ Skip to main content

An examination of the causes, consequences, and policy responses to the migration of highly trained health personnel from the Philippines: the high cost of living/leaving—a mixed method study

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, March 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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
469 Mendeley
Title
An examination of the causes, consequences, and policy responses to the migration of highly trained health personnel from the Philippines: the high cost of living/leaving—a mixed method study
Published in
Human Resources for Health, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12960-017-0198-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Erlinda Castro-Palaganas, Denise L. Spitzer, Maria Midea M. Kabamalan, Marian C. Sanchez, Ruel Caricativo, Vivien Runnels, Ronald Labonté, Gail Tomblin Murphy, Ivy Lynn Bourgeault

Abstract

Dramatic increases in the migration of human resources for health (HRH) from developing countries like the Philippines can have consequences on the sustainability of health systems. In this paper, we trace the outflows of HRH from the Philippines, map out its key causes and consequences, and identify relevant policy responses. This mixed method study employed a decentered, comparative approach that involved three phases: (a) a scoping review on health workers' migration of relevant policy documents and academic literature on health workers' migration from the Philippines; and primary data collection with (b) 37 key stakeholders and (c) household surveys with seven doctors, 329 nurses, 66 midwives, and 18 physical therapists. Filipino health worker migration is best understood within the context of macro-, meso-, and micro-level factors that are situated within the political, economic, and historical/colonial legacy of the country. Underfunding of the health system and un- or underemployment were push factors for migration, as were concerns for security in the Philippines, the ability to practice to full scope or to have opportunities for career advancement. The migration of health workers has both negative and positive consequences for the Philippine health system and its health workers. Stakeholders focused on issues such as on brain drain, gain, and circulation, and on opportunities for knowledge and technology transfer. Concomitantly, migration has resulted in the loss of investment in human capital. The gap in the supply of health workers has affected the quality of care delivered, especially in rural areas. The opening of overseas opportunities has commercialized health education, compromised its quality, and stripped the country of skilled learning facilitators. The social cost of migration has affected émigrés and their families. At the household level, migration has engendered increased consumerism and materialism and fostered dependency on overseas remittances. Addressing these gaps requires time and resources. At the same time, migration is, however, seen by some as an opportunity for professional growth and enhancement, and as a window for drafting more effective national and inter-country policy responses to HRH mobility. Unless socioeconomic conditions are improved and health professionals are provided with better incentives, staying in the Philippines will not be a viable option. The massive expansion in education and training designed specifically for outmigration creates a domestic supply of health workers who cannot be absorbed by a system that is underfunded. This results in a paradox of underservice, especially in rural and remote areas, at the same time as underemployment and outmigration. Policy responses to this paradox have not yet been appropriately aligned to capture the multilayered and complex nature of these intersecting phenomena.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 469 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 469 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 11%
Student > Bachelor 47 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 8%
Researcher 32 7%
Lecturer 32 7%
Other 87 19%
Unknown 183 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 101 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 47 10%
Social Sciences 46 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 18 4%
Computer Science 9 2%
Other 54 12%
Unknown 194 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 12 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,438,979
of 25,425,223 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#120
of 1,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,962
of 323,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#4
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,425,223 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 323,979 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.