↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Assessing the implementation process and outcomes of newly introduced assistant roles: a qualitative study to examine the utility of the Calderdale Framework as an appraisal tool

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Assessing the implementation process and outcomes of newly introduced assistant roles: a qualitative study to examine the utility of the Calderdale Framework as an appraisal tool
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, December 2012
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s35493
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan Nancarrow, Anna Moran, Leah Wiseman, Alison C Pighills, Karen Murphy

Abstract

Internationally, the health workforce has undergone rapid transformation to help meet growing staffing demands and population requirements. Several tools have been developed to support workforce change processes. The Calderdale Framework (CF) is one such tool designed to facilitate competency-based training by engaging team members in a seven step process involving awareness raising, service and task analysis, competency identification, establishing support systems, training, and sustaining. This paper explores the utility of the CF as an appraisal tool to assess whether adherence to the tool influences outcomes. The CF was applied retrospectively to three complete evaluations of allied health assistant role introduction: a new podiatry assistant role (Australia), speech pathology assistant (Australia), and occupational therapy assistant practitioner role (UK). Adherence to the CF was associated with more effective and efficient use of the role, role flexibility and career development opportunities for assistants, and role sustainability. Services are less likely to succeed in their workforce change process if they fail to plan for and use a structured approach to change, assign targeted leadership, undertake staff engagement and consultation, and perform an initial service analysis. The CF provides a clear template for appraising the implementation of new roles and highlights the potential consequences of not adhering to particular steps in the implementation process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 5%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 15%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 5 13%
Researcher 5 13%
Professor 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 10 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 15%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 13 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 21 March 2019.
All research outputs
#6,385,333
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#236
of 805 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,911
of 277,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 805 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 277,168 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.