| Title |
Taking Power, Politics, and Policy Problems Seriously
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Urban Health, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11524-012-9694-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kelly Murphy, Patrick Fafard |
| Abstract |
Knowledge translation (KT) is a growing movement in clinical and health services research, aimed to help make research more relevant and to move research into practice and policy. This paper examines the conventional model of policy change presented in KT and assesses its applicability for increasing the impact of urban health research on urban health policy. In general, KT conceptualizes research utilization in terms of the technical implementation of scientific findings, on the part of individual decision-makers who can be "targeted" for a KT intervention, in a context that is absent of political interests. However, complex urban health problems and interventions infrequently resemble this single decision, single decision-maker model posited by KT. In order to clarify the conditions under which urban health research is more likely or not to have an influence on public policy development, we propose to supplement the conventional model with three concepts drawn from the social science: policy stages, policy networks, and a discourse analysis approach for theorizing power in policy-making. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 4 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 23% |
| Researcher | 15 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Librarian | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 23% |
| Unknown | 7 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 31 | 39% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 23 November 2016.
All research outputs
#7,361,703
of 23,934,148 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#725
of 1,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,999
of 168,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#27
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,934,148 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 168,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.