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 |
Interrupted Time Series Versus Statistical Process Control in Quality Improvement Projects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nursing Care Quality, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1097/ncq.0000000000000130 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Magnus Andersson Hagiwara, Boel Andersson Gäre, Mattias Elg |
| Abstract |
To measure the effect of quality improvement interventions, it is appropriate to use analysis methods that measure data over time. Examples of such methods include statistical process control analysis and interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis. This article compares the use of statistical process control analysis and interrupted time series with segmented regression analysis for evaluating the longitudinal effects of quality improvement interventions, using an example study on an evaluation of a computerized decision support system. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 32 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 38% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
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 15 April 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nursing Care Quality
#584
of 878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#278,483
of 399,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nursing Care Quality
#13
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 878 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 399,674 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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.