↓ Skip to main content

Specialisation versus special interest - the Australian podiatry experience

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Specialisation versus special interest - the Australian podiatry experience
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13047-015-0127-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ainslie Davies, Paul Bennett, Susan Nancarrow, Antonio Cuesta-Vargas

Abstract

Ensuring efficient and effective delivery of health care to an ageing population has been a major driver for a review of the health workforce in Australia. As part of this process a National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (NRAS) has evolved with one goal being to improve workforce flexibility within a nationally consistent model of governance. In addition to increased flexibility, there have been discussions about maintaining standards and the role of specialisation. This study aims to explore the association between practitioners' self-perceptions about their special interest in musculoskeletal, diabetes related and podopaediatric foot care and the actual podiatry services they deliver in Australia. A cross sectional on-line survey was administered on behalf of the Australasian Podiatry Council and its' state based member associations. Self-reported data were collected over a 3-week interval and captured information about the practitioners by gender, years of clinical experience, area of work by state, work setting, and location. For those participants that identified with an area of special interest or specialty, further questions were asked regarding support for the area of special interest through education, and activities performed in treating patients in the week prior to survey completion. Queensland University of Technology Human Research Ethics approval was sought and confirmed exemption from review. 218 podiatrists participated in the survey. Participants were predominately female and worked in private practices. The largest area of personal interest by the podiatrists was related to the field of musculoskeletal podiatry (n = 65), followed closely by diabetes foot care (n = 61), and a third area identified was in the management of podopaediatric conditions (n = 26). Health workforce reform in Australia is in part being managed by the federal government with a goal to meet the health care needs of Australians into the future. The recognition of a specialty registration of podiatric surgery and endorsement for scheduled medicines was established with this workforce reform in mind. Addition of new subspecialties may be indicated based on professional development, to maintain high standards and meet community expectations.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 23%
Professor 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Unspecified 2 15%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 38%
Unspecified 3 23%
Psychology 2 15%
Sports and Recreations 1 8%
Social Sciences 1 8%
Other 1 8%

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 24 September 2019.
All research outputs
#3,931,130
of 13,584,320 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#341
of 546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,537
of 357,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#53
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,584,320 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 546 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 357,841 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.