↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Two-factor theory – at the intersection of health care management and patient satisfaction

Overview of attention for article published in ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Two-factor theory – at the intersection of health care management and patient satisfaction
Published in
ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR, October 2012
DOI 10.2147/ceor.s29347
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josef Bohm

Abstract

Using data obtained from the 2004 Joint Canadian/United States Survey of Health, an analytic model using principles derived from Herzberg's motivational hygiene theory was developed for evaluating patient satisfaction with health care. The analysis sought to determine whether survey variables associated with consumer satisfaction act as Hertzberg factors and contribute to survey participants' self-reported levels of health care satisfaction. To validate the technique, data from the survey were analyzed using logistic regression methods and then compared with results obtained from the two-factor model. The findings indicate a high degree of correlation between the two methods. The two-factor analytical methodology offers advantages due to its ability to identify whether a factor assumes a motivational or hygienic role and assesses the influence of a factor within select populations. Its ease of use makes this methodology well suited for assessment of multidimensional variables.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Researcher 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 24 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 8 12%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 25 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 October 2012.
All research outputs
#20,110,957
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#385
of 514 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,935
of 191,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research: CEOR
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 514 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 191,340 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 3 of them.