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 |
A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-5-82 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christian D Helfrich, Laura J Damschroder, Hildi J Hagedorn, Ginger S Daggett, Anju Sahay, Mona Ritchie, Teresa Damush, Marylou Guihan, Philip M Ullrich, Cheryl B Stetler |
| Abstract |
The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, or PARIHS, is a conceptual framework that posits key, interacting elements that influence successful implementation of evidence-based practices. It has been widely cited and used as the basis for empirical work; however, there has not yet been a literature review to examine how the framework has been used in implementation projects and research. The purpose of the present article was to critically review and synthesize the literature on PARIHS to understand how it has been used and operationalized, and to highlight its strengths and limitations. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 566 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 9 | 2% |
| Canada | 9 | 2% |
| United States | 7 | 1% |
| Australia | 4 | <1% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Uganda | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 528 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 105 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 93 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 71 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 50 | 9% |
| Other | 33 | 6% |
| Other | 125 | 22% |
| Unknown | 89 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 148 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 91 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 86 | 15% |
| Psychology | 47 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 15 | 3% |
| Other | 56 | 10% |
| Unknown | 123 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 May 2016.
All research outputs
#14,190,698
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,486
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,517
of 99,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 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 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 99,390 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 54% of its contemporaries.