You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The impact of a large-scale quality improvement programme on work engagement: Preliminary results from a national cross-sectional-survey of the ‘Productive Ward’
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nursing Studies, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.05.002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mark White, John S.G. Wells, Tony Butterworth |
| Abstract |
Quality improvement (QI) Programmes, like the Productive Ward: Releasing-time-to-care initiative, aim to 'engage' and 'empower' ward teams to actively participate, innovate and lead quality improvement at the front line. However, little is known about the relationship and impact that QI work has on the 'engagement' of the clinical teams who participate and vice-versa. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 81 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 | 38 | 47% |
| Canada | 3 | 4% |
| South Africa | 3 | 4% |
| Ireland | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Timor-Leste | 1 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 28 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 45 | 56% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 27 | 33% |
| Scientists | 8 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 246 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Croatia | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 242 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 66 | 27% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 7% |
| Researcher | 17 | 7% |
| Other | 53 | 22% |
| Unknown | 52 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Business, Management and Accounting | 41 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 39 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 12% |
| Engineering | 29 | 12% |
| Psychology | 19 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 13% |
| Unknown | 57 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 17 June 2015.
All research outputs
#755,622
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#70
of 2,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,881
of 245,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nursing Studies
#1
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 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 2,652 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 245,732 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 29 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 96% of its contemporaries.