↓ Skip to main content

IMatter: validation of the NHS Scotland Employee Engagement Index

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
IMatter: validation of the NHS Scotland Employee Engagement Index
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12913-014-0535-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Austyn Snowden, Ewan MacArthur

Abstract

BackgroundEmployee engagement is a fundamental component of quality healthcare. In order to provide empirical data of engagement in NHS Scotland an Employee Engagement Index was co-constructed with staff. `iMatter¿ consists of 25 Likert questions developed iteratively from the literature and a series of validation events with NHS Scotland staff. The aim of this study was to test the face, content and construct validity of iMatter.MethodsCross sectional survey of NHS Scotland staff. In January 2013 iMatter was sent to 2300 staff across all disciplines in NHS Scotland. 1280 staff completed it. Demographic data were collected. Internal consistency of the scale was calculated. Construct validity consisted of concurrent application of factor analysis and Rasch analysis. Face and content validity were checked using 3 focus groups.ResultsThe sample was representative of the NHSScotland population. iMatter showed very strong reliability (¿¿=¿0.958). Factor analysis revealed a four-factor structure consistent with the following interpretation: 1. My experience as an individual2. My experience with my direct line manager3. My experience with my team4. My experience with my organisationEach subscale also showed high level of internal consistency within all disciplines. Rasch analysis confirmed the majority of items fit with the latent trait of staff engagement with infit statistics between 0.7 and 1.3; and showed a good spread of item difficulty covering person ability. Focus groups found the questionnaire valid it terms of brevity, relevance and clarity.ConclusionsiMatter showed evidence of high reliability and validity. It is a popular measure of staff engagement in NHS Scotland. Implications for practice focus on the importance of coproduction in psychometric development.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 5%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 37 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Lecturer 3 8%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 11 28%
Psychology 4 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Computer Science 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 9 23%

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 22 December 2015.
All research outputs
#15,309,583
of 22,769,322 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#5,549
of 7,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,523
of 263,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#115
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,769,322 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 263,177 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.