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 |
Conocimiento tácito: características en la práctica enfermera
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Gaceta Sanitaria, March 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.gaceta.2017.11.002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalia Pérez-Fuillerat, M. Carmen Solano-Ruiz, Manuel Amezcua |
| Abstract |
Tacit knowledge can be defined as knowledge which is used intuitively and unconsciously, which is acquired through one's experience, characterized by being personal and contextual. Some terms such as 'intuition', 'know how' and 'implicit knowledge' have been used to describe tacit knowledge. Different disciplines in the fields of management or health have studied tacit knowledge, identifying it as a powerful tool to create knowledge and clinical decision-making. The aim of this review is to analyse the definition and characteristics that make up tacit knowledge and determine the role it plays in the nursing discipline. An integrative review was undertaken of the literature published up to November 2016 in the databases CUIDEN, SciELO, PubMed, Cochrane and CINAHL. The synthesis and interpretation of the data was performed by two researchers through content analysis. From a total of 819 articles located, 35 articles on tacit knowledge and nursing were chosen. There is no consensus on the name and description of results in tacit knowledge. The main characteristics of tacit knowledge have a personal and social character, which is used from an organised mental structure, called mindline. This structure relates to the use of tacit knowledge on clinical decision-making. Previous studies on tacit knowledge and nursing provide the nursing community with perspectives without going into depth. The production of a framework is suggested, as it would clarify implied concepts and its role on the management of nursing knowledge. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 | 4 | 36% |
| Chile | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 55% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 71 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 36 | 51% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 8 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 13% |
| Unknown | 35 | 49% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 April 2020.
All research outputs
#4,292,359
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Gaceta Sanitaria
#81
of 466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,939
of 370,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Gaceta Sanitaria
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 466 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 370,588 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 77% of its contemporaries.
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. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.