↓ Skip to main content

Improving Health Promotion Using Quality Improvement Techniques in Australian Indigenous Primary Health Care

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Improving Health Promotion Using Quality Improvement Techniques in Australian Indigenous Primary Health Care
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00053
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nikki Percival, Lynette O’Donoghue, Vivian Lin, Komla Tsey, Ross Stewart Bailie

Abstract

Although some areas of clinical health care are becoming adept at implementing continuous quality improvement (CQI) projects, there has been limited experimentation of CQI in health promotion. In this study, we examined the impact of a CQI intervention on health promotion in four Australian Indigenous primary health care centers. Our study objectives were to (a) describe the scope and quality of health promotion activities, (b) describe the status of health center system support for health promotion activities, and (c) introduce a CQI intervention and examine the impact on health promotion activities and health centers systems over 2 years. Baseline assessments showed suboptimal health center systems support for health promotion and significant evidence-practice gaps. After two annual CQI cycles, there were improvements in staff understanding of health promotion and systems for planning and documenting health promotion activities had been introduced. Actions to improve best practice health promotion, such as community engagement and intersectoral partnerships, were inhibited by the way health center systems were organized, predominately to support clinical and curative services. These findings suggest that CQI can improve the delivery of evidence-based health promotion by engaging front line health practitioners in decision-making processes about the design/redesign of health center systems to support the delivery of best practice health promotion. However, further and sustained improvements in health promotion will require broader engagement of management, senior staff, and members of the local community to address organizational and policy level barriers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Thailand 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 26%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Researcher 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 15 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 22%
Social Sciences 6 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Psychology 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 21 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 02 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,689,067
of 25,729,842 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,685
of 14,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,371
of 315,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#28
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,729,842 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,395 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
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 315,900 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.