| Title |
External validity in healthy public policy: application of the RE-AIM tool to the field of housing improvement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-12-633 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hilary J Thomson, Sian Thomas |
| Abstract |
Researchers and publishers have called for improved reporting of external validity items and for testing of existing tools designed to assess reporting of items relevant to external validity. Few tools are available and most of this work has been done within the field of health promotion. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Qatar | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Librarian | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 6 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 14% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
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 30 March 2016.
All research outputs
#6,469,399
of 22,953,506 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,823
of 14,958 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,954
of 167,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#121
of 327 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,953,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,958 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 167,326 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 327 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 61% of its contemporaries.