↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to health promotion activities in public hospitals

Overview of attention for article published in Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, October 1996
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Barriers to health promotion activities in public hospitals
Published in
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, October 1996
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-842x.1996.tb01629.x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Despite the central role hospitals have in the health care system, relatively few health promotion activities are conducted in Australian public hospitals. This study investigated the types of obstacles that were perceived to inhibit health promotion activities in hospitals. A questionnaire for self-completion was sent to medical superintendents in all public hospitals in Queensland and 112 questionnaires were returned (92.6 per cent response rate). The results indicated that lack of finance, lack of interest by relevant others, and needs (for appropriate programs, training and patient receptivity) were the barriers reported by superintendents. The barriers of 'interest' and 'needs' were related to a lack of written policies in some areas, but not directly to levels of other health promotion activities being conducted in the hospitals. Success in facilitating health promotion programs in hospitals will need to include a change in the environment, in particular the views of medical superintendents. The combination of attitude change and the availability of a motivated person (such as a health promotion officer) to lead the activities may be needed in order to produce an increase in the level of health promotion in public hospitals.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 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 %
Brazil 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Other 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Other 4 22%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 17%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 August 1999.
All research outputs
#9,514,662
of 27,774,969 outputs
Outputs from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#1,152
of 2,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,477
of 31,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,774,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,031 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.8. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 31,002 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 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