↓ Skip to main content

Conceptualisation of the characteristics of advanced practitioners in the medical radiation professions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Conceptualisation of the characteristics of advanced practitioners in the medical radiation professions
Published in
Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences, June 2015
DOI 10.1002/jmrs.115
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tony Smith, Jillian Harris, Nick Woznitza, Sharon Maresse, Charlotte Sale

Abstract

Professions grapple with defining advanced practice and the characteristics of advanced practitioners. In nursing and allied health, advanced practice has been defined as 'a state of professional maturity in which the individual demonstrates a level of integrated knowledge, skill and competence that challenges the accepted boundaries of practice and pioneers new developments in health care'. Evolution of advanced practice in Australia has been slower than in the United Kingdom, mainly due to differences in demography, the health system and industrial relations. This article describes a conceptual model of advanced practitioner characteristics in the medical radiation professions, taking into account experiences in other countries and professions. Using the CanMEDS framework, the model includes foundation characteristics of communication, collaboration and professionalism, which are fundamental to advanced clinical practice. Gateway characteristics are: clinical expertise, with high level competency in a particular area of clinical practice; scholarship and teaching, including a masters qualification and knowledge dissemination through educating others; and evidence-based practice, with judgements made on the basis of research findings, including research by the advanced practitioner. The pinnacle of advanced practice is clinical leadership, where the practitioner has a central role in the health care team, with the capacity to influence decision making and advocate for others, including patients. The proposed conceptual model is robust yet adaptable in defining generic characteristics of advanced practitioners, no matter their clinical specialty. The advanced practice roles that evolve to meet future health service demand must focus on the needs of patients, local populations and communities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
New Zealand 1 1%
Unknown 69 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 31%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Professor 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 23 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Environmental Science 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 27 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 December 2015.
All research outputs
#6,312,200
of 25,084,886 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences
#119
of 464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,690
of 268,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,084,886 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 268,858 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.