↓ Skip to main content

Dual practice in the health sector: review of the evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, October 2004
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 (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
3 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
159 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
243 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
Dual practice in the health sector: review of the evidence
Published in
Human Resources for Health, October 2004
DOI 10.1186/1478-4491-2-14
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paulo Ferrinho, Wim Van Lerberghe, Inês Fronteira, Fátima Hipólito, André Biscaia

Abstract

This paper reports on income generation practices among civil servants in the health sector, with a particular emphasis on dual practice. It first approaches the subject of public-private overlap. Thereafter it focuses on coping strategies in general and then on dual practice in particular.To compensate for unrealistically low salaries, health workers rely on individual coping strategies. Many clinicians combine salaried, public-sector clinical work with a fee-for-service private clientele. This dual practice is often a means by which health workers try to meet their survival needs, reflecting the inability of health ministries to ensure adequate salaries and working conditions.Dual practice may be considered present in most countries, if not all. Nevertheless, there is surprisingly little hard evidence about the extent to which health workers resort to dual practice, about the balance of economic and other motives for doing so, or about the consequences for the proper use of the scarce public resources dedicated to health.In this paper dual practice is approached from six different perspectives: (1) conceptual, regarding what is meant by dual practice; (2) descriptive, trying to develop a typology of dual practices; (3) quantitative, trying to determine its prevalence; (4) impact on personal income, the health care system and health status; (5) qualitative, looking at the reasons why practitioners so frequently remain in public practice while also working in the private sector and at contextual, personal life, institutional and professional factors that make it easier or more difficult to have dual practices; and (6) possible interventions to deal with dual practice.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 243 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 2 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Bangladesh 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Unknown 234 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 60 25%
Researcher 38 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 8%
Student > Bachelor 14 6%
Other 53 22%
Unknown 32 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 68 28%
Social Sciences 43 18%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 22 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 16 7%
Other 29 12%
Unknown 45 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,529,163
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#131
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,974
of 76,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 76,067 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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