↓ Skip to main content

Global collaborative healthcare: assessing the resource requirements at a leading Academic Medical Center

Overview of attention for article published in Globalization and Health, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Global collaborative healthcare: assessing the resource requirements at a leading Academic Medical Center
Published in
Globalization and Health, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12992-017-0298-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole J. Rosson, Heitham T. Hassoun

Abstract

Academic Medical Centers ("AMCs") have served as a hub of the United States ("US") health system and represented the state-of-the art in American health care for well over a century. Currently, the global healthcare market is both massive and expanding and is being altered by the unprecedented impact of technological advances and globalization. This provides AMCs a platform to enter into trans-national collaborative partnerships with healthcare organizations around the world, thus providing a means to deliver on its promise globally while also expanding and diversifying its resources. A number of leading US AMCs have engaged in global collaborative healthcare, employing different models based on services offered, global distribution, and inclination to assume risk. Engaging in these collaborations requires significant effort from across the health system, and an understanding of the resources required is paramount for effective delivery and to avoid overextension and diversion from the primary mission of these organizations. The goal of this paper is to discuss the role of US AMCs in this current global healthcare landscape and to also investigate our institutional faculty and staff resource requirements to support the operating model. We extracted and retrospectively analyzed data from the JHI Global Services database for a 3-year period (Jan, 2013-Dec, 2015) to determine total utilization (hours and full time equivalent (FTE)), utilization by profession, and clinical and non-clinical areas of expertise. JHI utilized on average 21,940 h annually, or 10.55 FTEs of faculty and staff subject matter experts. The majority of the hours are for work performed by physician faculty members from 23 departments within the School of Medicine, representing 77% percent or on average 16,894 h annually. Clinical and allied health departments had an average annual utilization of 17,642 h or 7.8 FTEs, while non-clinical departments, schools and institutes averaged 4298 h or 1.9 FTEs, representing 80.4% and 19.6% respectively. We found that significant human resources are required within a broad range of AMC subject matter expertise across multiple disciplines, and that with adequate forecasting AMCs can successfully engage in these collaborations while continuing to fulfill their core mission.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Librarian 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 13 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Psychology 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 14 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#16,777,427
of 24,676,547 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#1,051
of 1,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,366
of 322,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#24
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,676,547 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 322,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.