↓ Skip to main content

Educating the Public Health Workforce: A Scoping Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, February 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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
Educating the Public Health Workforce: A Scoping Review
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00027
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donghua Tao, Connie J. Evashwick, Michal Grivna, Roger Harrison

Abstract

The aim of this scoping review was to identify and characterize the recent literature pertaining to the education of the public health workforce worldwide. The importance of preparing a public health workforce with sufficient capacity and appropriate capabilities has been recognized by major organizations around the world (1). Champions for public health note that a suitably educated workforce is essential to the delivery of public health services, including emergency response to biological, manmade, and natural disasters, within countries and across the globe. No single repository offers a comprehensive compilation of who is teaching public health, to whom, and for what end. Moreover, no international consensus prevails on what higher education should entail or what pedagogy is optimal for providing the necessary education. Although health agencies, public or private, might project workforce needs, the higher level of education remains the sole responsibility of higher education institutions. The long-term goal of this study is to describe approaches to the education of the public health workforce around the world by identifying the peer-reviewed literature, published primarily by academicians involved in educating those who will perform public health functions. This paper reports on the first phase of the study: identifying and categorizing papers published in peer-reviewed literature between 2000 and 2015.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 25%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 19 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 25%
Social Sciences 6 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 20 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 12 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,259,538
of 23,798,792 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#919
of 11,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,408
of 332,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#26
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,798,792 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,503 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 332,316 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.