↓ Skip to main content

Moving Knowledge into Action: Developing the Rapid Synthesis and Translation Process Within the Interactive Systems Framework

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Community Psychology, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Moving Knowledge into Action: Developing the Rapid Synthesis and Translation Process Within the Interactive Systems Framework
Published in
American Journal of Community Psychology, July 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10464-012-9537-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally Thigpen, Richard W. Puddy, Helen Harber Singer, Diane M. Hall

Abstract

The Interactive Systems Framework (ISF) for Dissemination and Implementation presents an overall framework for translating knowledge into action. Each of its three systems requires further clarification and explanation to truly understand how to conduct this work. This article describes the development and initial application of the Rapid Synthesis and Translation Process (RSTP) using the exchange model of knowledge transfer in the context of one of the ISF systems: the Prevention Synthesis and Translation System (see [special issue "introduction" article] for a translation of the Wandersman et al. (Am J Community Psychol 41:3-4, 2008) article using the RSTP). This six-step process, which was developed by and for the Division of Violence Prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in collaboration with partners, serves as an example of how a federal agency can expedite the transfer of research knowledge to practitioners to prevent violence. While the RSTP itself represents one of the possible functions in the Prevention Synthesis and Translation System, the resulting products affect both prevention support and prevention delivery as well. Examples of how practitioner and researcher feedback were incorporated into the Rapid Synthesis and Translation Process are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 121 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 29 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 20%
Student > Master 17 14%
Other 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 16 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 30 24%
Psychology 27 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Other 24 19%
Unknown 25 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 30 November 2022.
All research outputs
#6,859,196
of 24,554,073 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Community Psychology
#381
of 1,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,629
of 167,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Community Psychology
#6
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,554,073 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 167,683 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 72% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.