↓ Skip to main content

A systems science perspective on the capacity for change in public hospitals

Overview of attention for article published in Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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.
Title
A systems science perspective on the capacity for change in public hospitals
Published in
Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13584-017-0143-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Braithwaite, J. Westbrook, E. Coiera, W. B. Runciman, R. Day, K. Hillman, J. Herkes

Abstract

Many types of organisation are difficult to change, mainly due to structural, cultural and contextual barriers. Change in public hospitals is arguably even more problematic than in other types of hospitals, due to features such as structural dysfunctionalities and bureaucracy stemming from being publicly-run institutions. The main goals of this commentary are to bring into focus and highlight the "3 + 3 Decision Framework" proposed by Edwards and Saltman. This aims to help guide policymakers and managers implementing productive change in public hospitals. However, while change from the top is popular, there are powerful front-line clinicians, especially doctors, who can act to counterbalance top-down efforts. Front-line clinicians have cultural characteristics and power that allows them to influence or reject managerial decisions. Clinicians in various lower-level roles can also influence other clinicians to resist or ignore management requirements. The context is further complicated by multi-stakeholder agendas, differing goals, and accumulated inertia. The special status of clinicians, along with other system features of public hospitals, should be factored into efforts to realise major system improvements and progressive change.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 26%
Student > Master 10 18%
Other 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 15 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 11 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Engineering 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Other 13 23%
Unknown 13 23%
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 31 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,834,993
of 23,342,664 outputs
Outputs from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#413
of 585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,455
of 310,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Israel Journal of Health Policy Research
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,664 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 585 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 310,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.