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 |
Development and validation of an index to assess hospital quality management systems
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal for Quality in Health Care, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1093/intqhc/mzu021 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. Wagner, O. Groene, C. A. Thompson, N. S. Klazinga, M. Dersarkissian, O. A. Arah, R. Suñol, on behalf of the DUQuE Project Consortium, N Klazinga, DS Kringos, MJMH Lombarts, T Plochg, MA Lopez, M Secanell, R Sunol, P Vallejo, P Bartels, S Kristensen, P Michel, F Saillour-Glenisson, F Vlcek, M Car, S Jones, E Klaus, S Bottaro, P Garel, M Saluvan, C Bruneau, A Depaigne-Loth, C Shaw, A Hammer, O Ommen, H Pfaff, O Groene, D Botje, C Wagner, H Kutaj-Wasikowska, B Kutryba, A Escoval, A Lívio, M Eiras, M Franca, I Leite, F Almeman, H Kus, K Ozturk, R Mannion, OA Arah, A Chow, M DerSarkissian, CA Thompson, A Wang, A Thompson |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to develop and validate an index to assess the implementation of quality management systems (QMSs) in European countries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 5% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 98 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 14% |
| Researcher | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 24% |
| Unknown | 27 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 13% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 8% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 11 September 2015.
All research outputs
#5,437,472
of 22,747,498 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Quality in Health Care
#522
of 1,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,620
of 220,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Quality in Health Care
#11
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,747,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,522 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 220,818 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 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 70% of its contemporaries.