↓ Skip to main content

Staffing remote rural areas in middle- and low-income countries: A literature review of attraction and retention

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, January 2008
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
3 policy sources
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
452 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
828 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Staffing remote rural areas in middle- and low-income countries: A literature review of attraction and retention
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, January 2008
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-8-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Uta Lehmann, Marjolein Dieleman, Tim Martineau

Abstract

Many countries in middle- and low-income countries today suffer from severe staff shortages and/or maldistribution of health personnel which has been aggravated more recently by the disintegration of health systems in low-income countries and by the global policy environment. One of the most damaging effects of severely weakened and under-resourced health systems is the difficulty they face in producing, recruiting, and retaining health professionals, particularly in remote areas. Low wages, poor working conditions, lack of supervision, lack of equipment and infrastructure as well as HIV and AIDS, all contribute to the flight of health care personnel from remote areas. In this global context of accelerating inequities health service policy makers and managers are searching for ways to improve the attraction and retention of staff in remote areas. But the development of appropriate strategies first requires an understanding of the factors which influence decisions to accept and/or stay in a remote post, particularly in the context of mid and low income countries (MLICS), and which strategies to improve attraction and retention are therefore likely to be successful. It is the aim of this review article to explore the links between attraction and retention factors and strategies, with a particular focus on the organisational diversity and location of decision-making.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 828 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 <1%
United States 4 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Pakistan 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Other 8 <1%
Unknown 802 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 183 22%
Researcher 91 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 79 10%
Student > Bachelor 67 8%
Student > Postgraduate 59 7%
Other 190 23%
Unknown 159 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 241 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 119 14%
Social Sciences 113 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 40 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 3%
Other 108 13%
Unknown 185 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 24 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,639,580
of 23,743,910 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#564
of 7,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,845
of 159,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,743,910 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 7,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. 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 159,267 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 96% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.