↓ Skip to main content

Differences in wage rates for males and females in the health sector: a consideration of unpaid overtime to decompose the gender wage gap

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, February 2013
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)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
9 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 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
Differences in wage rates for males and females in the health sector: a consideration of unpaid overtime to decompose the gender wage gap
Published in
Human Resources for Health, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1478-4491-11-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nerina Vecchio, Paul A Scuffham, Michael F Hilton, Harvey A Whiteford

Abstract

In Australia a persistent and sizable gender wage gap exists. In recent years this gap has been steadily widening. The negative impact of gender wage differentials is the disincentive to work more hours. This implies a substantial cost on the Australian health sector. This study aimed to identify the magnitude of gender wage differentials within the health sector. The investigation accounts for unpaid overtime. Given the limited availability of information, little empirical evidence exists that accounts for unpaid overtime.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

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 %
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 21%
Student > Master 6 13%
Professor 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 11 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Social Sciences 7 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 11 23%

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 15 March 2022.
All research outputs
#1,969,831
of 21,991,334 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#223
of 1,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,347
of 171,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,991,334 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 171,081 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 1 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