| Title |
Synthesising practice guidelines for the development of community-based exercise programmes after stroke
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-8-115 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Leon Poltawski, Charles Abraham, Anne Forster, Victoria A Goodwin, Cherry Kilbride, Rod S Taylor, Sarah Dean |
| Abstract |
Multiple guidelines are often available to inform practice in complex interventions. Guidance implementation may be facilitated if it is tailored to particular clinical issues and contexts. It should also aim to specify all elements of interventions that may mediate and modify effectiveness, including both their content and delivery. We conducted a focused synthesis of recommendations from stroke practice guidelines to produce a structured and comprehensive account to facilitate the development of community-based exercise programmes after stroke. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 75 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 22 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 October 2013.
All research outputs
#12,884,409
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,333
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,383
of 207,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#33
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 207,105 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 42 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.