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 |
Institutionalization of evidence-informed practices in healthcare settings
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, November 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-7-112 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gabriela Novotná, Maureen Dobbins, Joanna Henderson |
| Abstract |
The effective and timely integration of the best available research evidence into healthcare practice has considerable potential to improve the quality of provided care. Knowledge translation (KT) approaches aim to develop, implement, and evaluate strategies to address the research-practice gap. However, most KT research has been directed toward implementation strategies that apply cognitive, behavioral, and, to a lesser extent, organizational theories. In this paper, we discuss the potential of institutional theory to inform KT-related research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 60% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 5 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 20% |
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 10% |
| Other | 19 | 21% |
| Unknown | 15 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 16% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 7% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 20 February 2023.
All research outputs
#3,296,546
of 23,462,326 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#696
of 1,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,150
of 279,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#7
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,462,326 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,730 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 279,876 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.