↓ Skip to main content

A multicriteria resource allocation model for the redesign of services following birth

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
A multicriteria resource allocation model for the redesign of services following birth
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3430-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Bowers, Helen Cheyne, Gillian Mould, Martin Miller, Miranda Page, Fiona Harris, Debra Bick

Abstract

Many healthcare services are under considerable pressure to reduce costs while improving quality. This is particularly true in the United Kingdom's National Health Service where postnatal care is sometimes viewed as having a low priority. There is much debate about the service's redesign and the reallocation of resources, both along care pathways and between groups of mothers and babies with different needs. The aim of this study was to develop a decision support tool that would encourage a systemic approach to service redesign and that could assess the various quality and financial implications of service change options making the consequent trade-offs explicit. The paper describes the development process and an initial implementation as a preliminary exploration of the possible merits of this approach. Other studies have suggested that combining multicriteria decision analysis with programme budgeting and marginal analysis might offer a suitable basis for resource allocation decisions in healthcare systems. The Postnatal care Resource Allocation Model incorporated this approach in a decision support tool to analyse the consequences of varying design parameters, notably staff contacts and time, on the various quality domains and costs. The initial phase of the study focussed on mapping postnatal care, involving interviews and workshops with a variety of stakeholders. This was supplemented with a literature review and the resultant knowledge base was encoded in the decision support tool. The model was then tested with various stakeholders before being used in an NHS Trust in England. The model provides practical support, helping staff explore options and articulate their proposals for the redesign of postnatal care. The integration of cost and quality domains facilitates trade-offs, allowing staff to explore the benefits of reallocating resources between hospital and community-based care, and different patient-categories. The main benefits of the model include its structure for assembling the key data, sharing evidence amongst multi-professional teams and encouraging constructive, systemic debate. Although the model was developed in the context of the routine maternity services for mothers and babies in the days following birth it could be adapted for use in other health care services.

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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Researcher 7 7%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 31 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Psychology 6 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 5%
Other 27 27%
Unknown 33 33%
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 04 November 2018.
All research outputs
#13,253,803
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,315
of 7,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,999
of 335,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#132
of 185 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 335,197 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 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 185 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.