| Title |
Selecting, refining and identifying priority Cochrane Reviews in health communication and participation in partnership with consumers and other stakeholders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, April 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12961-019-0444-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anneliese J. Synnot, Allison Tong, Peter Bragge, Dianne Lowe, Jack S. Nunn, Molly O’Sullivan, Lidia Horvat, Debra Kay, Davina Ghersi, Steve McDonald, Naomi Poole, Noni Bourke, Natasha A. Lannin, Danny Vadasz, Sandy Oliver, Karen Carey, Sophie J. Hill |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 10 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | 26% |
| Spain | 2 | 6% |
| United States | 2 | 6% |
| Cameroon | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 79% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
| Scientists | 3 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 184 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 30 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 10% |
| Researcher | 11 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 20% |
| Unknown | 68 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 8 | 4% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 28 | 15% |
| Unknown | 72 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 04 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,608,353
of 24,821,035 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#171
of 1,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,702
of 356,363 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#9
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,821,035 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 356,363 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.