↓ Skip to main content

Putting program evaluation to work: a framework for creating actionable knowledge for suicide prevention practice

Overview of attention for article published in Translational Behavioral Medicine, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
Title
Putting program evaluation to work: a framework for creating actionable knowledge for suicide prevention practice
Published in
Translational Behavioral Medicine, September 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13142-012-0175-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie Wilkins, Sally Thigpen, Jennifer Lockman, Juliette Mackin, Mary Madden, Tamara Perkins, James Schut, Christina Van Regenmorter, Lygia Williams, John Donovan

Abstract

The economic and human cost of suicidal behavior to individuals, families, communities, and society makes suicide a serious public health concern, both in the US and around the world. As research and evaluation continue to identify strategies that have the potential to reduce or ultimately prevent suicidal behavior, the need for translating these findings into practice grows. The development of actionable knowledge is an emerging process for translating important research and evaluation findings into action to benefit practice settings. In an effort to apply evaluation findings to strengthen suicide prevention practice, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) supported the development of three actionable knowledge products that make key findings and lessons learned from youth suicide prevention program evaluations accessible and useable for action. This paper describes the actionable knowledge framework (adapted from the knowledge transfer literature), the three products that resulted, and recommendations for further research into this emerging method for translating research and evaluation findings and bridging the knowledge-action gap.

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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 77 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 23%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 19 24%
Unknown 16 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 18 23%
Psychology 15 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 21 27%
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 03 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,111,780
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#398
of 988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,251
of 171,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#4
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 171,752 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 73% 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 done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.