↓ 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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 8 4%
Canada 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 180 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 19%
Student > Master 30 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 11%
Researcher 21 11%
Other 12 6%
Other 44 23%
Unknown 28 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 58 30%
Psychology 39 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 3%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 38 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,767,413
of 13,503,657 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#913
of 1,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,923
of 148,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#10
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,503,657 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 148,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.