↓ Skip to main content

Professional Supervision in Health Services

Overview of attention for article published in Australian Journal of Rural Health, June 2015
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

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Professional Supervision in Health Services
Published in
Australian Journal of Rural Health, June 2015
DOI 10.1111/ajr.12192
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wendy Ducat, Priya Martin, Saravana Kumar, Vanessa Burge, LuJuana Abernathy

Abstract

Improving the quality and safety of health care in Australia is imperative to ensure the right treatment is delivered to the right person at the right time. Achieving this requires appropriate clinical governance and support for health professionals, including professional supervision. This study investigates the usefulness and effectiveness of and barriers to supervision in rural and remote Queensland. As part of the evaluation of the Allied Health Rural and Remote Training and Support program, a qualitative descriptive study was conducted involving semi-structured interviews with 42 rural or remote allied health professionals, nine operational managers and four supervisors. The interviews explored perspectives on their supervision arrangements, including the perceived usefulness, effect on practice and barriers. Themes of reduced isolation; enhanced professional enthusiasm, growth and commitment to the organisation; enhanced clinical skills, knowledge and confidence; and enhanced patient safety were identified as perceived outcomes of professional supervision. Time, technology and organisational factors were identified as potential facilitators as well as potential barriers to effective supervision. This research provides current evidence on the impact of professional supervision in rural and remote Queensland. A multidimensional model of organisational factors associated with effective supervision in rural and remote settings is proposed identifying positive supervision culture and a good supervisor-supervisee fit as key factors associated with effective arrangements.

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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 68 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 19%
Other 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Researcher 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 18 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 9%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Psychology 5 7%
Computer Science 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 20 29%
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 08 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,438,924
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from Australian Journal of Rural Health
#408
of 719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,856
of 266,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian Journal of Rural Health
#9
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 266,892 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.