↓ Skip to main content

Beyond the parish pump: what next for public health?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2018
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
31 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Beyond the parish pump: what next for public health?
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12889-018-5791-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex Hall, Jonathan Hammond, Donna Bramwell, Anna Coleman, Lynsey Warwick-Giles, Kath Checkland

Abstract

Public health has had a history characterised by uncertainty of purpose, locus of control, and workforce identity. In many health systems, the public health function is fragmented, isolated and under-resourced. We use the most recent major reforms to the English National Health Service and local government, the Health and Social Care Act 2012 (HSCA12), as a lens through which to explore the changing nature of public health professionalism. This paper is based upon a 3-year longitudinal study into the impacts of the HSCA12 upon the commissioning system in England, in which we conducted 141 interviews with 118 commissioners and senior staff from a variety of health service commissioner and provider organisations, local government, and the third sector. For the present paper, we developed a subset of data relevant to public health, and analysed it using a framework derived from the literature on public health professionalism, exploring themes identified from relevant policy documents and research. The move of public health responsibilities into local government introduced an element of politicisation which challenged public health professional autonomy. There were mixed feelings about the status of public health as a specialist profession. The creation of a national public health organisation helped raise the profile of profession, but there were concerns about clarity of responsibilities, accountability, and upholding 'pure' public health professional values. There was confusion about the remit of other organisations in relation to public health. Where public health professionals sit in a health system in absolute terms is less important than their ability to develop relationships, negotiate their roles, and provide expert public health influence across that system. A conflation between 'population health' and 'public health' fosters unrealistic expectations of the profession. Public health may be best placed to provide leadership for other stakeholders and professional groups working towards improving health outcomes of their defined populations, but there remains a need to clarify the role(s) that public health as a specialist profession has to play in helping to fulfil population health goals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 31 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 25 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 16%
Social Sciences 10 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 10%
Psychology 4 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 25 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 06 December 2019.
All research outputs
#1,226,888
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,320
of 15,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,171
of 326,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#43
of 334 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 326,767 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 334 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.