You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Applying what works: a systematic search of the transfer and implementation of promising Indigenous Australian health services and programs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-12-600 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Janya McCalman, Komla Tsey, Anton Clifford, Wendy Earles, Anthony Shakeshaft, Roxanne Bainbridge |
| Abstract |
The transfer and implementation of acceptable and effective health services, programs and innovations across settings provides an important and potentially cost-effective strategy for reducing Indigenous Australians' high burden of disease. This study reports a systematic review of Indigenous health services, programs and innovations to examine the extent to which studies considered processes of transfer and implementation within and across Indigenous communities and healthcare settings. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 70 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 14% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Psychology | 6 | 8% |
| Arts and Humanities | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 29% |
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 03 August 2012.
All research outputs
#19,763,387
of 24,289,456 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#13,853
of 16,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,411
of 167,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#313
of 347 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,289,456 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 167,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 347 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.