↓ Skip to main content

Healthcare Professional Shortage and Task-Shifting to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease: Implications for Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Overview of attention for article published in Current Cardiology Reports, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Healthcare Professional Shortage and Task-Shifting to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease: Implications for Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Published in
Current Cardiology Reports, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11886-015-0672-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lungiswa Primrose Tsolekile, Shafika Abrahams-Gessel, Thandi Puoane

Abstract

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) account for 18 million of annual global deaths with more than three quarters of these deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). In LMIC, the distribution of risk factors is heterogeneous, with urban areas being the worst affected. Despite the availability of effective CVD interventions in developed countries, many poor countries still struggle to provide care due to lack of resources. In addition, many LMIC suffer from staff shortages which pose additional burden to the healthcare system. Regardless of these challenges, there are potentially effective strategies such as task-shifting which have been used for chronic conditions such as HIV to address the human resource crisis. We propose that through task-shifting, certain tasks related to prevention be shifted to non-physician health workers as well as non-nurse health workers such as community health workers. Such steps will allow better coverage of segments of the underserved population. We recognise that for task-shifting to be effective, issues such as clearly defined roles, evaluation, on-going training, and supervision must be addressed.

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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 25%
Researcher 9 15%
Unspecified 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 18 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 20%
Unspecified 11 19%
Social Sciences 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 10%

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 23 November 2015.
All research outputs
#10,391,741
of 13,029,564 outputs
Outputs from Current Cardiology Reports
#346
of 541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,150
of 353,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Cardiology Reports
#15
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,029,564 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 541 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 353,550 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.