↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Key factors influencing allied health research capacity in a large Australian metropolitan health district

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Key factors influencing allied health research capacity in a large Australian metropolitan health district
Published in
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, August 2017
DOI 10.2147/jmdh.s142009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer A Alison, Bill Zafiropoulos, Robert Heard

Abstract

The aim of this study was to identify key factors affecting research capacity and engagement of allied health professionals working in a large metropolitan health service. Identifying such factors will assist in determining strategies for building research capacity in allied health. A total of 276 allied health professionals working within the Sydney Local Health District (SLHD) completed the Research Capacity in Context Tool (RCCT) that measures research capacity and culture across three domains: organization, team, and individual. An exploratory factor analysis was undertaken to identify common themes within each of these domains. Correlations were performed between demographic variables and the identified factors to determine possible relationships. Research capacity and culture success/skill levels were reported to be higher within the organization and team domains compared to the individual domain (median [interquartile range, IQR] 6 [5-8], 6 [5-8], 5 [3-7], respectively; Friedman χ(2)(2)=42.04, p<0.001). Exploratory factor analyses were performed to identify factors that were perceived by allied health respondents to affect research capacity. Factors identified within the organization domain were infrastructure for research (eg, funds and equipment) and research culture (eg, senior manager's support for research); within the team domain the factors were research orientation (eg, dissemination of results at research seminars) and research support (eg, providing staff research training). Within the individual domain, only one factor was identified which was the research skill of the individual (eg, literature evaluation, submitting ethics applications and data analysis, and writing for publication). The reported skill/success levels in research were lower for the individual domain compared to the organization or team domains. Key factors were identified in each domain that impacted on allied health research capacity. As these factors were different in each domain, various strategies may be required at the level of the organization, team, and individual to support and build allied health research capacity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Lecturer 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 9 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 5 19%
Social Sciences 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 12%
Psychology 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 11 42%

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 10 August 2017.
All research outputs
#7,221,995
of 11,595,461 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#162
of 268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,036
of 265,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,595,461 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 265,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.