| Title |
A realist process evaluation within the Facilitating Implementation of Research Evidence (FIRE) cluster randomised controlled international trial: an exemplar
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, November 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-018-0811-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jo Rycroft-Malone, Kate Seers, Ann Catrine Eldh, Karen Cox, Nicola Crichton, Gill Harvey, Claire Hawkes, Alison Kitson, Brendan McCormack, Christel McMullan, Carole Mockford, Theo Niessen, Paul Slater, Angie Titchen, Teatske van der Zijpp, Lars Wallin |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 70 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 | 20 | 29% |
| Canada | 7 | 10% |
| Australia | 7 | 10% |
| United States | 5 | 7% |
| Ireland | 3 | 4% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Curaçao | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 26 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 33 | 47% |
| Members of the public | 31 | 44% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 183 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 16% |
| Researcher | 21 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 29 | 16% |
| Unknown | 56 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 13% |
| Social Sciences | 23 | 13% |
| Psychology | 16 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 24 | 13% |
| Unknown | 60 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 09 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,015,875
of 25,663,438 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#141
of 1,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,040
of 337,927 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#5
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,663,438 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,817 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 92% 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 337,927 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.