↓ Skip to main content

Registered nurses’ preferences for rural and urban jobs: A discrete choice experiment

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nursing Studies, May 2018
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 (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
117 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
Registered nurses’ preferences for rural and urban jobs: A discrete choice experiment
Published in
International Journal of Nursing Studies, May 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.05.012
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Recruitment and retention of nurses is an ongoing challenge for employers in rural areas worldwide. There is limited information available regarding influences on nurses' job choice in the U.S. and little understanding of how nurses make trade-offs between desired and less desirable job characteristics when choosing between jobs. The purpose of this research was to examine the hospital job preferences of registered nurses in the U.S. The specific objectives of the study were: 1) To identify the relative importance of key job attributes on registered nurse job choice, and 2) To predict the impact of changes in the levels of attributes on the probability of registered nurses choosing one job over another. A discrete choice experiment was developed and applied in the U.S. using California as a study site. 190 registered nurses currently working in nursing or intending to return to work in nursing from urban, large-, small- and isolated-rural communities. The survey instrument was developed through a literature review and semi-structured interviews with nurse experts, utilizing a hypothetical job in a hospital medical / surgical unit. Experimental design principles were applied to create a discrete choice experiment which was pilot tested with urban and rural nurses. The survey was mailed to a random sample of 1000 licensed registered nurses in California. A mixed logit model was used to estimate nurses' preferences for different levels of the job attributes. Willingness to pay estimates and simulations of job uptake rates were calculated. Eight factors were identified as important to job choice: earnings, nursing voice in management, tuition reimbursement, scheduling, patient care team, leadership, location and nursing sensitive patient care outcomes. Respondents valued a cohesive patient care team (coefficient 1.95, [SE 0.23]) and a strong nursing voice in management (coefficient 1.56, [SE 0.22]) highest. A job in a large urban inland location was negatively valued (coefficient -0.69, [SE 0.25]). Around 72% of respondents chose to stay in their current job when this choice was offered. While earnings were important, nurses were willing to sacrifice earnings to secure other valued job characteristics when choosing between jobs. Study findings provide information on how job characteristics are valued by nurses in California. Findings suggest job seekers may be 65-75 percent more likely to choose a job when valued job characteristics are present. Our findings are particularly relevant to rural hospitals with limited financial resources.

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 8 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 117 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 117 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 19 16%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Lecturer 5 4%
Other 17 15%
Unknown 44 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 36 31%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 47 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 05 December 2025.
All research outputs
#2,638,497
of 29,790,967 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#388
of 2,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,553
of 349,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#10
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,790,967 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 349,158 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.