↓ Skip to main content

The impact of health worker migration on development dynamics: evidence of wealth effects from Africa

Overview of attention for article published in HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
Title
The impact of health worker migration on development dynamics: evidence of wealth effects from Africa
Published in
HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care, March 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10198-013-0465-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simplice A. Asongu

Abstract

This article examines three relevant hypotheses on the effect of health worker migration on human development and economic prosperity (at the macro- and micro-levels) in Africa. Owing to the lack of relevant data on health human resource (HHR) migration for the continent, the subject matter has remained empirically void over the last decades despite the acute concern about health professional emigration. Using quantile regression, the following findings have been established. (1) The effect of HHR emigration is positive (negative) at low (high) levels of economic growth. (2) HHR emigration improves (mitigates) human development (GDP per capita growth) in low (high) quantiles of the distribution. (3) Specific differences in effects are found in top quantiles of human development and low quantiles of GDP per capita growth where the physician (nurse) emigration elasticities of development are positive (negative) and negative (positive), respectively. As a policy implication, blanket health-worker emigration control policies are unlikely to succeed across countries with different levels of human development and economic prosperity. Hence, the policies should be contingent on the prevailing levels of development and tailored differently across the most and least developed African countries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 23 23%
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Researcher 5 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 30 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 30 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 33 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 June 2014.
All research outputs
#15,169,949
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#802
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,222
of 207,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HEPAC Health Economics in Prevention and Care
#14
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 207,751 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.