| Title |
Factors associated with the impact of quality improvement collaboratives in mental healthcare: An exploratory study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-7-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marleen H Versteeg, Miranda GH Laurant, Gerdien C Franx, Annelies J Jacobs, Michel JP Wensing |
| Abstract |
Quality improvement collaboratives (QICs) bring together groups of healthcare professionals to work in a structured manner to improve the quality of healthcare delivery within particular domains. We explored which characteristics of the composition, participation, functioning, and organization of these collaboratives related to changes in the healthcare for patients with anxiety disorders, dual diagnosis, or schizophrenia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 148 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 17% |
| Researcher | 25 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 36 | 23% |
| Unknown | 20 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 16% |
| Psychology | 24 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 11% |
| Unknown | 25 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 May 2012.
All research outputs
#20,156,199
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,688
of 1,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,820
of 242,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#17
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,716 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 242,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.