↓ Skip to main content

Qualitative study of views and experiences of performance management for healthcare-associated infections

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hospital Infection, February 2016
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
47 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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
Qualitative study of views and experiences of performance management for healthcare-associated infections
Published in
Journal of Hospital Infection, February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jhin.2016.01.021
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. Brewster, C. Tarrant, M. Dixon-Woods

Abstract

Centrally led performance management regimes using standard setting, monitoring, and incentives have become a prominent feature of infection prevention and control (IPC) in health systems. To characterize views and experiences of regulation and performance management relating to IPC in English hospitals. Two qualitative datasets containing 139 interviews with healthcare workers and managers were analysed. Data directly relevant to performance management and IPC were extracted. Data analysis was based on the constant comparative method. Participants reported that performance management regimes had mobilized action around specific infections. The benefits of establishing organizational structures of accountability were seen in empirical evidence of decreasing infection rates. Performance management was not, however, experienced as wholly benign, and setting targets in one area was seen to involve risks of 'tunnel vision' and the marginalization of other potentially important issues. Financial sanctions were viewed especially negatively; performance management was associated with risks of creating a culture of fearfulness, suppressing learning and disrupting inter-professional relationships. Centrally led performance management may have some important roles in IPC, but identifying where it is appropriate and determining its limits is critical. Persisting with harsh regimes may affect relationships and increase resistance to continued improvement efforts, but leaving all improvement to local teams may also be a flawed strategy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 47 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 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 127 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 17%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Lecturer 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Other 29 23%
Unknown 32 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 17 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 12%
Social Sciences 13 10%
Engineering 9 7%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 35 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 21 November 2016.
All research outputs
#1,567,190
of 25,724,500 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hospital Infection
#306
of 4,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,700
of 411,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hospital Infection
#5
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,724,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,080 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 411,899 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.