↓ Skip to main content

Do Leadership Style, Unit Climate, and Safety Climate Contribute to Safe Medication Practices?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nursing Administration, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Do Leadership Style, Unit Climate, and Safety Climate Contribute to Safe Medication Practices?
Published in
Journal of Nursing Administration, January 2017
DOI 10.1097/nna.0000000000000430
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This study aims at: examining if leadership style and unit climate predict safety climate; and testing the direct, indirect, and total effect of leadership style, unit climate, and safety climate on nurses' safe medication practices. The Institute of Medicine and nursing scholars propose that safety climate is a prerequisite to safety practices. However, there is limited empirical evidence about factors contributing to the development of safety climate and about the association with nurses' safe medication practices. This cross-sectional study used survey data from 246 RNs working in a Magnet® hospital. Leadership style and unit climate predicted 20% to 50% of variance on all safety climate dimensions. Model testing revealed the indirect impact of leadership style and unit climate on nurses' safe medication practices. Our hypothesized model explained small amount of the variance on nurses' safe medication practices. This finding suggests that nurses' safe medication practices are influenced by multiple contextual and personal factors that should be further examined.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 102 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 18%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 7 7%
Professor 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 36 35%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 43 42%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 39 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 March 2017.
All research outputs
#10,711,833
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nursing Administration
#570
of 2,116 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,766
of 462,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nursing Administration
#9
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 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 2,116 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 462,777 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.