Title |
Deriving Implementation Strategies for Outcome Monitoring Feedback from Theory, Research and Practice
|
---|---|
Published in |
Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, September 2014
|
DOI | 10.1007/s10488-014-0589-6 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Kim de Jong |
Abstract |
Outcome monitoring feedback is a promising intervention to enhance outcomes of clinical practice. However, effective implementation can be tough and research suggests that feedback is not equally effective under all circumstances. In this article, feedback theory, research and experience from clinical practice is used to provide implementation strategies. Factors that moderate the effectiveness of outcome monitoring feedback, including feedback, recipient and organization characteristics are discussed. It is important to pay attention to implementation processes, such as providing sufficient training for clinicians, in order for feedback to be capable of enhancing outcomes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 States | 2 | 50% |
Australia | 1 | 25% |
Netherlands | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 3 | 75% |
Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
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 % |
---|---|---|
United States | 4 | 5% |
Canada | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 72 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 13 | 17% |
Researcher | 12 | 16% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 16% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 13% |
Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
Other | 11 | 14% |
Unknown | 15 | 19% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Psychology | 44 | 57% |
Social Sciences | 7 | 9% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 4% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
Other | 3 | 4% |
Unknown | 17 | 22% |
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 24 September 2014.
All research outputs
#13,718,294
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#409
of 670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#112,066
of 241,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
#12
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 670 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 241,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.