↓ Skip to main content

Factors affecting retention of allied health professionals working with people with disability in rural New South Wales, Australia: discrete choice experiment questionnaire development

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Factors affecting retention of allied health professionals working with people with disability in rural New South Wales, Australia: discrete choice experiment questionnaire development
Published in
Human Resources for Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12960-015-0013-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gisselle Gallego, Angela Dew, Kim Bulkeley, Craig Veitch, Michelle Lincoln, Anita Bundy, Jennie Brentnall

Abstract

This paper describes the development of a discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire to identify the factors (attributes) that allied health professionals (AHPs) working with people with disability identify as important to encouraging them to remain practising in rural areas. Focus groups and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 97 purposively selected service providers working with people with disability in rural New South Wales, Australia. Focus groups and interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analysed using a modified grounded theory approach involving thematic analysis and constant comparison. Six attributes that may influence AHPs working with people with disability in rural areas to continue to do so were inductively identified: travel arrangements, work flexibility, professional support, professional development, remuneration, and autonomy of practice. The qualitative research information was combined with a policy review to define these retention factors and ensure that they are amenable to policy changes. The use of various qualitative research methods allowed the development of a policy-relevant DCE questionnaire that was grounded in the experience of the target population (AHPs).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 81 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 29 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 10%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 7%
Psychology 6 7%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 32 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 April 2015.
All research outputs
#14,915,133
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#979
of 1,261 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,545
of 279,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#29
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 279,762 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.