| Title |
A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kathryn Oliver, Simon Innvar, Theo Lorenc, Jenny Woodman, James Thomas |
| Abstract |
The gap between research and practice or policy is often described as a problem. To identify new barriers of and facilitators to the use of evidence by policymakers, and assess the state of research in this area, we updated a systematic review. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 400 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 108 | 27% |
| United States | 28 | 7% |
| Australia | 25 | 6% |
| Canada | 24 | 6% |
| Chile | 11 | 3% |
| South Africa | 7 | 2% |
| Ireland | 6 | 2% |
| Spain | 5 | 1% |
| Italy | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 41 | 10% |
| Unknown | 141 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 253 | 63% |
| Scientists | 81 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 47 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 16 | 4% |
| Unknown | 3 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 13 | 1% |
| Canada | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 2 | <1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| Australia | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Kenya | 1 | <1% |
| Botswana | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 10 | <1% |
| Unknown | 1104 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 204 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 190 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 173 | 15% |
| Other | 62 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 59 | 5% |
| Other | 221 | 19% |
| Unknown | 234 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 280 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 197 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 101 | 9% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 38 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 37 | 3% |
| Other | 199 | 17% |
| Unknown | 291 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 366. 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 31 January 2024.
All research outputs
#88,157
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#10
of 8,750 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#705
of 320,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,750 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 320,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.