↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Are some health professionals more cognizant of clinical governance development concepts than others? Findings from a New Zealand study
Published in
Journal of Public Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1093/pubmed/fdv045
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Clinical governance has been promoted in recent years as core to improving patient safety. Effective clinical governance requires partnerships between 'management' and health professionals as well as equal involvement of all professional groups. Professionals must also be willing to engage in clinical governance activities such as working to improve care systems and patient safety. There is limited research into the relative understanding of core clinical governance concepts amongst different professional groups or the extent to which professionals are prepared to take up opportunities to 'change the system'. A 2012 national survey study of health professionals employed in New Zealand health boards sought to probe understanding of and commitment to clinical governance following introduction of a 2009 policy. Respondent data showed only limited policy implementation had occurred. Regression analyses revealed statistically significant differences in perceptions of knowledge of clinical governance concepts and structures by gender, age, experience and profession, as well as in seeking opportunities to change the system. These findings have implications for policy makers in terms of ensuring that clinical governance implementation provides equal opportunity for engendering involvement of different health professionals.

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 2 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 52 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 %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 6%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 19 37%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 13 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 19%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 18 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 April 2015.
All research outputs
#17,299,425
of 25,394,081 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Public Health
#2,352
of 3,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,905
of 279,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Public Health
#44
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,081 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 279,360 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.