↓ Skip to main content

Blogs as a way to elicit feedback on research and engage stakeholders.

Overview of attention for article published in Nurse Researcher, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Blogs as a way to elicit feedback on research and engage stakeholders.
Published in
Nurse Researcher, January 2015
DOI 10.7748/nr.22.3.41.e1300
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Aim To reflect on the potential of blogs to enhance engagement with research, create a dialogue between researchers and nurses, and provide feedback to researchers. Background Blogs can create opportunities to share ideas, provide an arena for interaction, and rapidly and effectively initiate dialogue and feedback on research. Data sources This paper draws on analysis of comments on a blog post about the findings of a peer-reviewed journal article. Review methods Content analysis of web blog discussion. Discussion It is unclear if the readers of the blog would have accessed this article any other way. Therefore, posting research findings on a blog can engage a new audience of nurses and provide a way to feed back comments and responses to researchers. This highlights the potential value of online forums for 'knowledge translation' and draws attention to virtual collegiality, which can provide a way for nurses in diverse locations to share their experiences and ideas, and gain support and information. Conclusion Research findings were brought to life through the participation of blog commenters, who validated findings reported in the research. Implications for practice/research Given the rapid uptake of social media, it is inevitable that it will become an increasingly important feature of research. This paper demonstrates how the nexus can occur between more formal social enquiry and less formal engagement in critique and knowledge translation. The authors argue that the rapid uptake and exchange of information through social media can provide an indication of the social relevance of the research.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 10 28%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 17%
Social Sciences 5 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 August 2015.
All research outputs
#27,365,409
of 33,979,905 outputs
Outputs from Nurse Researcher
#278
of 329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#313,056
of 412,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nurse Researcher
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,979,905 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 412,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.