↓ Skip to main content

Measuring inequalities in the distribution of health workers: the case of Tanzania

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, January 2009
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
103 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
223 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
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
Measuring inequalities in the distribution of health workers: the case of Tanzania
Published in
Human Resources for Health, January 2009
DOI 10.1186/1478-4491-7-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael A Munga, Ottar Mæstad

Abstract

The overall human resource shortages and the distributional inequalities in the health workforce in many developing countries are well acknowledged. However, little has been done to measure the degree of inequality systematically. Moreover, few attempts have been made to analyse the implications of using alternative measures of health care needs in the measurement of health workforce distributional inequalities. Most studies have implicitly relied on population levels as the only criterion for measuring health care needs. This paper attempts to achieve two objectives. First, it describes and measures health worker distributional inequalities in Tanzania on a per capita basis; second, it suggests and applies additional health care needs indicators in the measurement of distributional inequalities.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 3 1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 210 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 13%
Researcher 24 11%
Student > Bachelor 18 8%
Student > Postgraduate 16 7%
Other 58 26%
Unknown 32 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 37%
Social Sciences 33 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 9 4%
Other 28 13%
Unknown 41 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 30 August 2019.
All research outputs
#3,201,919
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#380
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,788
of 184,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,261 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 184,475 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.