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 |
Implementation of hospital governing boards: views from the field
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-178 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zahirah McNatt, Jennifer W Thompson, Abraham Mengistu, Dawit Tatek, Erika Linnander, Leulseged Ageze, Ruth Lawson, Negalign Berhanu, Elizabeth H Bradley |
| Abstract |
Decentralization through the establishment of hospital governing boards has been touted as an effective way to improve the quality and efficiency of hospitals in low-income countries. Although several studies have examined the process of decentralization, few have quantitatively assessed the implementation of hospital governing boards and their impact on hospital performance. Therefore, we sought to describe the functioning of governing boards and to determine the association between governing board functioning and hospital performance. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 101 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 17% |
| Researcher | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 17% |
| Unknown | 29 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 18% |
| Unknown | 36 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,432,249
of 23,885,338 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,997
of 8,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,636
of 229,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#35
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,885,338 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 229,322 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.