| Title |
Involving service users in the qualitative analysis of patient narratives to support healthcare quality improvement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Research Involvement and Engagement, January 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40900-018-0133-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Louise Locock, Susan Kirkpatrick, Lucy Brading, Gordon Sturmey, Jocelyn Cornwell, Neil Churchill, Glenn Robert |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 138 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 | 65 | 47% |
| Ireland | 6 | 4% |
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| Canada | 4 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 53 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 73 | 53% |
| Scientists | 43 | 31% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 19 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 122 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 17% |
| Researcher | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 8% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 18% |
| Unknown | 33 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 16% |
| Psychology | 15 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 9% |
| Design | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 12% |
| Unknown | 35 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 91. 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 22 March 2022.
All research outputs
#477,193
of 25,724,500 outputs
Outputs from Research Involvement and Engagement
#17
of 519 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,605
of 448,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Research Involvement and Engagement
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,724,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 519 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 448,727 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.