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 |
Galvanizers, Guides, Champions, and Shields: The Many Ways That Policymakers Use Public Health Researchers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Milbank Quarterly, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2011.00643.x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
ABBY S. HAYNES, JAMES A. GILLESPIE, GEMMA E. DERRICK, WAYNE D. HALL, SALLY REDMAN, SIMON CHAPMAN, HEIDI STURK |
| Abstract |
Public health researchers make a limited but important contribution to policy development. Some engage with policy directly through committees, advisory boards, advocacy coalitions, ministerial briefings, intervention design consultation, and research partnerships with government, as well as by championing research-informed policy in the media. Nevertheless, the research utilization literature has paid little attention to these diverse roles and the ways that policymakers use them. This article describes how policymakers use researchers in policymaking and examines how these activities relate to models of research utilization. It also explores the extent to which policymakers' accounts of using researchers concur with the experiences of "policy-engaged" public health researchers. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 2 | 40% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 4 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 23% |
| Researcher | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 12% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Librarian | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 18% |
| Unknown | 26 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 36 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 7% |
| Psychology | 6 | 5% |
| Decision Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Unknown | 31 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 21 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,425,078
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Milbank Quarterly
#258
of 1,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,119
of 248,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Milbank Quarterly
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 248,905 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 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.