↓ Skip to main content

Building Healthy Start Grantees’ Capacity to Achieve Collective Impact: Lessons from the Field

Overview of attention for article published in Maternal and Child Health Journal, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Building Healthy Start Grantees’ Capacity to Achieve Collective Impact: Lessons from the Field
Published in
Maternal and Child Health Journal, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10995-017-2373-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly Bradley, Karuna S. Chibber, Naima Cozier, Peggy Vander Meulen, Colleen Ayres-Griffin

Abstract

Purpose While Healthy Start has emphasized the need for multi-sectorial community engagement and collaboration since its inception, in 2014 Healthy Start adopted Collective Impact (CI) as a framework for reducing infant mortality. This paper describes the development of a peer-focused capacity-building strategy that introduced key elements of CI and preliminary findings of Healthy Start grantees' progress with using CI as an approach to collaboration. Description The Collective Impact Peer Learning Networks (CI-PLNs) consisted of eight 90-min virtual monthly meetings and one face-to-face session that reviewed CI pre-conditions and conditions. Evaluation sources included: a facilitated group discussion at the final CI-PLN exploring grantee CI and CAN accomplishments (n = 57); routine evaluations (n = 144 pre, 46 interim, and 40 post PLN) examining changes in knowledge and practices regarding CI; and post CI-PLN implementation, three in-depth interviews with grantees who volunteered to discuss their experience with CI and participation in the CI-PLN. Assessment CI-PLN participants reported increased knowledge and confidence in the application of CI. Several participants reported that the CI-PLN created a space for engaging in peer sharing challenges, successes, and best practices. Participants also reported a desire to continue implementing CI and furthering their learning. Conclusion The CI-PLNs met the initial goal of increasing Healthy Start grantees' understanding of CI and determining the initial focus of their efforts. By year five, the EPIC Center anticipates Healthy Start CANs will have a sustainable infrastructure in place that supports the established common agenda, shared measures, and ongoing and meaningful inclusion of community members.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Researcher 4 7%
Lecturer 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 23 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 12 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Psychology 5 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 23 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 December 2017.
All research outputs
#21,415,544
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#1,874
of 2,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#380,544
of 444,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#34
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,039 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 444,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.