| Title |
Towards a common terminology: a simplified framework of interventions to promote and integrate evidence into health practices, systems, and policies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-9-51 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heather Colquhoun, Jennifer Leeman, Susan Michie, Cynthia Lokker, Peter Bragge, Susanne Hempel, K Ann McKibbon, Gjalt-Jorn Y Peters, Kathleen R Stevens, Michael G Wilson, Jeremy Grimshaw |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 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 | 15 | 24% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | 10% |
| Australia | 4 | 6% |
| Chile | 3 | 5% |
| Spain | 3 | 5% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Ireland | 2 | 3% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 23 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 34 | 54% |
| Scientists | 17 | 27% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 315 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 303 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 58 | 18% |
| Researcher | 52 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 41 | 13% |
| Other | 25 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 78 | 25% |
| Unknown | 39 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 59 | 19% |
| Psychology | 51 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 47 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 9% |
| Decision Sciences | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 58 | 18% |
| Unknown | 65 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#795,703
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#86
of 1,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,397
of 234,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#2
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 234,816 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 96% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.