↓ Skip to main content

A Bridge Over Turbulent Waters: Illustrating the Interaction Between Managerial Leaders and Facilitators When Implementing Research Evidence

Overview of attention for article published in Worldviews on evidence-based nursing (Online), January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
A Bridge Over Turbulent Waters: Illustrating the Interaction Between Managerial Leaders and Facilitators When Implementing Research Evidence
Published in
Worldviews on evidence-based nursing (Online), January 2016
DOI 10.1111/wvn.12138
Pubmed ID
Authors

Teatske Johanna van der Zijpp, Theo Niessen, Ann Catrine Eldh, Claire Hawkes, Christel McMullan, Carole Mockford, Lars Wallin, Brendan McCormack, Jo Rycroft-Malone, Kate Seers

Abstract

Emerging evidence focuses on the importance of the role of leadership in successfully transferring research evidence into practice. However, little is known about the interaction between managerial leaders and clinical leaders acting as facilitators (internal facilitators [IFs]) in this implementation process. To describe the interaction between managerial leaders and IFs and how this enabled or hindered the facilitation process of implementing urinary incontinence guideline recommendations in a local context in settings that provide long-term care to older people. Semistructured interviews with 105 managers and 22 IFs, collected for a realist process evaluation across four European countries informed this study. An interpretive data analysis unpacks interactions between managerial leaders and IFs. This study identified three themes that were important in the interactions between managerial leaders and IFs that could hinder or support the implementation process: "realising commitment"; "negotiating conditions"; and "encouragement to keep momentum going." The findings revealed that the continuous reciprocal relationships between IFs and managerial leaders influenced the progress of implementation, and could slow the process down or disrupt it. A metaphor of crossing a turbulent river by the "building of a bridge" emerged as one way of understanding the findings. Our findings illuminate a neglected area, the effects of relationships between key staff on implementing evidence into practice. Relational aspects of managerial and clinical leadership roles need greater consideration when planning guideline implementation and practice change. In order to support implementation, staff assigned as IFs as well as stakeholders like managers at all levels of an organisation should be engaged in realising commitment, negotiating conditions, and keeping momentum going. Thus, communication is crucial between all involved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 18%
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 23 23%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 38 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 14%
Social Sciences 12 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 20 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 02 August 2016.
All research outputs
#4,442,066
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from Worldviews on evidence-based nursing (Online)
#104
of 634 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,516
of 405,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Worldviews on evidence-based nursing (Online)
#6
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 634 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 405,322 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.