This commentary describes the concept of evidence-based public health, including the limitations of evidence. Increased attention to evidence may have numerous benefits for public health practice, including access to higher-quality information on what works, a higher likelihood of successful programs and policies being implemented, greater workforce productivity, and more efficient use of resources. To broaden thinking on the sources and scope of evidence, the three reviews in this symposium seek to (a) compare and contrast several evaluation designs that are alternatives to the randomized controlled trial; (b) describe two research approaches that are useful in addressing complex, multilevel public health issues (i.e., mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews); and (c) provide an overview of the value and approaches for generating practice-based evidence. These reviews highlight the complexity and interrelatedness of public health challenges, limitations of researcher-driven, quantitative approaches, and the need to broaden our current concepts of evidence.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 April 2014.
All research outputs
#24,090,638
of 34,363,559 outputs
Outputs from Annual Review of Public Health
#923
of 955 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265,341
of 376,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annual Review of Public Health
#14
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,363,559 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 955 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 49.0. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 376,341 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
