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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Using staffing ratios for workforce planning: evidence on nine allied health professions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Resources for Health, February 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4491-10-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Cartmill, Tracy A Comans, Michele J Clark, Susan Ash, Lorraine Sheppard |
| Abstract |
Modern healthcare managers are faced with pressure to deliver effective, efficient services within the context of fixed budget constraints. Managers are required to make decisions regarding the skill mix of the workforce particularly when staffing new services. One measure used to identify numbers and mix of staff in healthcare settings is workforce ratio. The aim of this study was to identify workforce ratios in nine allied health professions and to identify whether these measures are useful for planning allied health workforce requirements. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 28 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Researcher | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 23% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 20% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 14 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
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 01 November 2021.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#855
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,740
of 253,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 253,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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.