↓ Skip to main content

Social networks and implementation of evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems: a mixed-methods study

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
98 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
241 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.
Title
Social networks and implementation of evidence-based practices in public youth-serving systems: a mixed-methods study
Published in
Implementation Science, September 2011
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-6-113
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lawrence A Palinkas, Ian W Holloway, Eric Rice, Dahlia Fuentes, Qiaobing Wu, Patricia Chamberlain

Abstract

The present study examines the structure and operation of social networks of information and advice and their role in making decisions as to whether to adopt new evidence-based practices (EBPs) among agency directors and other program professionals in 12 California counties participating in a large randomized controlled trial.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 3%
Canada 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 227 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 18%
Student > Master 35 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 11%
Researcher 25 10%
Other 13 5%
Other 53 22%
Unknown 45 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 62 26%
Psychology 44 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 2%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 56 23%
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 27 March 2013.
All research outputs
#18,333,600
of 22,703,044 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,643
of 1,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,647
of 131,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,703,044 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 131,821 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.