↓ Skip to main content

Gender-based distributional skewness of the United Republic of Tanzania’s health workforce cadres: a cross-sectional health facility survey

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
Title
Gender-based distributional skewness of the United Republic of Tanzania’s health workforce cadres: a cross-sectional health facility survey
Published in
Human Resources for Health, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1478-4491-11-28
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amon Exavery, Angelina M Lutambi, Neema Wilson, Godfrey M Mubyazi, Senga Pemba, Godfrey Mbaruku

Abstract

While severe shortages, inadequate skills and a geographical imbalance of health personnel have been consistently documented over the years as long term critical challenges in the health sector of the United Republic of Tanzania, there is limited evidence on the gender-based distribution of the health workforce and its likely implications. Extant evidence shows that some people may not seek healthcare unless they have access to a provider of their gender. This paper, therefore, assesses the gender-based distribution of the United Republic of Tanzania's health workforce cadres.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 3 4%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 64 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Master 10 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Other 7 10%
Lecturer 6 8%
Other 29 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 31%
Social Sciences 18 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Unspecified 6 8%
Computer Science 5 7%
Other 15 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 28 June 2013.
All research outputs
#7,017,653
of 11,733,405 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#576
of 628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,215
of 137,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,733,405 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 628 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 137,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.