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 |
How funding agencies can support research use in healthcare: an online province-wide survey to determine knowledge translation training needs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-9-71 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bev J Holmes, Megan Schellenberg, Kara Schell, Gayle Scarrow |
| Abstract |
Health research funding agencies are increasingly promoting evidence use in health practice and policy. Building on work suggesting how agencies can support such knowledge translation (KT), this paper discusses an online survey to assess KT training needs of researchers and research users as part of a Canadian provincial capacity-building effort. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 8 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 5 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 63% |
| Scientists | 3 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 11% |
| Librarian | 6 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 17% |
| Unknown | 18 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 24 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,974,424
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#607
of 1,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,335
of 235,550 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#7
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 235,550 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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.