| Title |
Models and frameworks of patient engagement in health services research: a scoping review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Research Involvement and Engagement, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40900-018-0111-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Maria Chudyk, Celeste Waldman, Tara Horrill, Lisa Demczuk, Carolyn Shimmin, Roger Stoddard, Serena Hickes, Annette S. H. Schultz |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 59 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 | 16 | 27% |
| United Kingdom | 13 | 22% |
| Ireland | 4 | 7% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 32 | 54% |
| Scientists | 23 | 39% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 21 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 11% |
| Psychology | 3 | 4% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 27 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 01 October 2018.
All research outputs
#1,145,691
of 25,795,662 outputs
Outputs from Research Involvement and Engagement
#90
of 521 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,852
of 348,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research Involvement and Engagement
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,795,662 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 521 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 348,610 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.