| Title |
The employee's productivity in the health care sector in Poland and their impact on the treatment process of patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient preference and adherence, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ppa.s119348 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Rosiek, Aleksandra Rosiek-Kryszewska, Łukasz Leksowski, Tomasz Kornatowski, Krzysztof Leksowski |
| Abstract |
Increasing the engagement of employees in the treatment process of patients may benefit a hospital and employee productivity and may result in better patient care and satisfaction with medical services. Given this, the first step in improving the quality of patient care is better availability of doctors for patients in a hospital ward. The research for this paper was conducted in six health care units in the Kuyavian-Pomeranian province in Poland. The research assessed how the elements relating to employees' behavior and things characteristic to medical service influence patients' willingness to recommend a hospital. Patients' perception of services is linked with the behavior of medical employees and their engagement in the treatment process. Our research indicates that individual employee recognition and collective recognition of hospital employees as a whole were identified as the most important factors in employee engagement in the treatment process (employee productivity) and patients' satisfaction with medical service. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 16% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 16 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2016.
All research outputs
#20,823,121
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient preference and adherence
#1,400
of 1,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#314,653
of 417,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient preference and adherence
#28
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,733 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 417,676 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.