| Title |
A description of a knowledge broker role implemented as part of a randomized controlled trial evaluating three knowledge translation strategies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, April 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-4-23 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maureen Dobbins, Paula Robeson, Donna Ciliska, Steve Hanna, Roy Cameron, Linda O'Mara, Kara DeCorby, Shawna Mercer |
| Abstract |
A knowledge broker (KB) is a popular knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) strategy emerging in Canada to promote interaction between researchers and end users, as well as to develop capacity for evidence-informed decision making. A KB provides a link between research producers and end users by developing a mutual understanding of goals and cultures, collaborates with end users to identify issues and problems for which solutions are required, and facilitates the identification, access, assessment, interpretation, and translation of research evidence into local policy and practice. Knowledge-brokering can be carried out by individuals, groups and/or organizations, as well as entire countries. In each case, the KB is linked with a group of end users and focuses on promoting the integration of the best available evidence into policy and practice-related decisions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 430 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 11 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 11 | 3% |
| United States | 6 | 1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| Botswana | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | 1% |
| Unknown | 389 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 76 | 18% |
| Researcher | 66 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 61 | 14% |
| Other | 42 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 33 | 8% |
| Other | 90 | 21% |
| Unknown | 62 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 128 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 64 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 31 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 25 | 6% |
| Psychology | 17 | 4% |
| Other | 83 | 19% |
| Unknown | 82 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 09 March 2024.
All research outputs
#3,298,785
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#670
of 1,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,256
of 109,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 109,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.