↓ Skip to main content

Addressing indigenous health workforce inequities: A literature review exploring 'best' practice for recruitment into tertiary health programmes

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2012
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 (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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
Addressing indigenous health workforce inequities: A literature review exploring 'best' practice for recruitment into tertiary health programmes
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1475-9276-11-13
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elana Curtis, Erena Wikaire, Kanewa Stokes, Papaarangi Reid

Abstract

Addressing the underrepresentation of indigenous health professionals is recognised internationally as being integral to overcoming indigenous health inequities. This literature review aims to identify 'best practice' for recruitment of indigenous secondary school students into tertiary health programmes with particular relevance to recruitment of Māori within a New Zealand context. METHODOLOGY/METHODS: A Kaupapa Māori Research (KMR) methodological approach was utilised to review literature and categorise content via: country; population group; health profession focus; research methods; evidence of effectiveness; and discussion of barriers. Recruitment activities are described within five broad contexts associated with the recruitment pipeline: Early Exposure, Transitioning, Retention/Completion, Professional Workforce Development, and Across the total pipeline.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 125 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 14%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Postgraduate 12 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Other 25 20%
Unknown 27 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 26 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 16%
Social Sciences 18 14%
Psychology 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 30 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 07 March 2022.
All research outputs
#3,028,272
of 21,940,852 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#559
of 1,829 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,832
of 141,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,940,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,829 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 141,262 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them