| Title |
The Calgary Audit and Feedback Framework: a practical, evidence-informed approach for the design and implementation of socially constructed learning interventions using audit and group feedback
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-018-0829-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lara J. Cooke, Diane Duncan, Laura Rivera, Shawn K. Dowling, Christopher Symonds, Heather Armson |
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 | 21 | 36% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 8% |
| Australia | 3 | 5% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Thailand | 1 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Colombia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 24 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 39% |
| Scientists | 22 | 37% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 13 | 22% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 101 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 20% |
| Unknown | 31 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 38 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 13 May 2021.
All research outputs
#1,078,101
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#162
of 1,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,176
of 364,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#7
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 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 1,821 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 364,761 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 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.