↓ Skip to main content

Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: A systematic review

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 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
Interventions encouraging the use of systematic reviews by health policymakers and managers: A systematic review
Published in
Implementation Science, April 2011
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-6-43
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laure Perrier, Kelly Mrklas, John N Lavis, Sharon E Straus

Abstract

Systematic reviews have the potential to inform decisions made by health policymakers and managers, yet little is known about the impact of interventions to increase the use of systematic reviews by these groups in decision making.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 7 6%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 109 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 19%
Student > Master 23 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Other 13 11%
Librarian 8 7%
Other 24 20%
Unknown 9 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 34%
Social Sciences 27 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 10%
Psychology 7 6%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 12 10%

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 01 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,912,643
of 14,555,805 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#562
of 1,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,813
of 71,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#2
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,555,805 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 1,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 71,059 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.