↓ Skip to main content

Shape of allied health: an environmental scan of 27 allied health professions in Victoria

Overview of attention for article published in Australian Health Review, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
49 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.
Article details
Title
Shape of allied health: an environmental scan of 27 allied health professions in Victoria
Published in
Australian Health Review, August 2016
DOI 10.1071/ah16026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan A Nancarrow, Gretchen Young, Katy O'Callaghan, Mathew Jenkins, Kathleen Philip, Kegan Barlow

Abstract

Objective In 2015, the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services commissioned the Victorian Allied Health Workforce Research Program to provide data on allied health professions in the Victorian public, private and not-for-profit sectors. Herein we present a snapshot of the demographic profiles and distribution of these professions in Victoria and discuss the workforce implications.Methods The program commenced with an environmental scan of 27 allied health professions in Victoria. This substantial scoping exercise identified existing data, resources and contexts for each profession to guide future data collection and research. Each environmental scan reviewed existing data relating to the 27 professions, augmented by an online questionnaire sent to the professional bodies representing each discipline.Results Workforce data were patchy but, based on the evidence available, the allied health professions in Victoria vary greatly in size (ranging from just 17 child life therapists to 6288 psychologists), are predominantly female (83% of professions are more than 50% female) and half the professions report that 30% of their workforce is aged under 30 years. New training programs have increased workforce inflows to many professions, but there is little understanding of attrition rates. Professions reported a lack of senior positions in the public sector and a concomitant lack of senior specialised staff available to support more junior staff. Increasing numbers of allied health graduates are being employed directly in private practice because of a lack of growth in new positions in the public sector and changing funding models. Smaller professions reported that their members are more likely to be professionally isolated within an allied health team or larger organisations. Uneven rural-urban workforce distribution was evident across most professions.Conclusions Workforce planning for allied health is extremely complex because of the lack of data, fragmented funding and regulatory frameworks and diverse employment contexts.What is known about this topic? There is a lack of good-quality workforce data on the allied health professions generally. The allied health workforce is highly feminised and unevenly distributed geographically, but there is little analysis of these issues across professions.What does this paper add? The juxtaposition of the health workforce demographics and distribution of 27 allied health professions in Victoria illustrates some clear trends and identifies several common themes across professions.What are the implications for practitioners? There are opportunities for the allied health professions to collectively address several of the common issues to achieve economies of scale, given the large number of professions and small size of many.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 27%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 9 18%
Social Sciences 7 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Psychology 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 20 41%
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 10 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,533,006
of 27,774,969 outputs
Outputs from Australian Health Review
#824
of 1,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,526
of 314,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian Health Review
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,774,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,175 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 314,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them