| Title |
Does a host country capture knowledge of migrant doctors and how might it? A study of UK doctors in New Zealand
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Public Health, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00038-015-0770-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robin Gauld, Simon Horsburgh |
| Abstract |
To investigate International Medical Graduate (IMG) perspectives on opportunities to share technical knowledge and professional experience with host country professionals and mechanisms for this. All IMGs from the UK registered with the New Zealand Medical Council who had arrived within the decade to 2014 were surveyed (n = 1357). The main outcome measures were respondent perceptions of host country receptivity to their potential knowledge contribution, and mechanisms through which knowledge might be shared. The survey response rate was 47 % (n = 632). 82 % of respondents agreed colleagues had been receptive to their knowledge contribution; 67 % felt they had been encouraged to share professional knowledge gained abroad; 60 % agreed they had been encouraged to share knowledge of the UK or other health systems. Only 45 % believed there were clear mechanisms in place for knowledge sharing. Statistically significant differences by age and professional practice designation were found. Knowledge transfer in the New Zealand context appeared to be relatively ad hoc. Options for improving knowledge transfer include formal organisational arrangements, use of knowledge brokers and building communities of practice in different areas. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 2 | 33% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 12% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 10 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 27% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,896,290
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Public Health
#816
of 1,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,381
of 393,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Public Health
#19
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 393,282 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.