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 |
The application of systems thinking in health: why use systems thinking?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-12-51 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David H Peters |
| Abstract |
This paper explores the question of what systems thinking adds to the field of global health. Observing that elements of systems thinking are already common in public health research, the article discusses which of the large body of theories, methods, and tools associated with systems thinking are more useful. The paper reviews the origins of systems thinking, describing a range of the theories, methods, and tools. A common thread is the idea that the behavior of systems is governed by common principles that can be discovered and expressed. They each address problems of complexity, which is a frequent challenge in global health. The different methods and tools are suited to different types of inquiry and involve both qualitative and quantitative techniques. The paper concludes by emphasizing that explicit models used in systems thinking provide new opportunities to understand and continuously test and revise our understanding of the nature of things, including how to intervene to improve people's health. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 67 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 Kingdom | 14 | 21% |
| United States | 7 | 10% |
| Canada | 5 | 7% |
| Switzerland | 3 | 4% |
| Lebanon | 1 | 1% |
| Tunisia | 1 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| Sri Lanka | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 28 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 42 | 63% |
| Scientists | 13 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 15% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 890 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | <1% |
| United States | 4 | <1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Thailand | 1 | <1% |
| Sri Lanka | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 875 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 184 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 118 | 13% |
| Researcher | 99 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 54 | 6% |
| Other | 48 | 5% |
| Other | 155 | 17% |
| Unknown | 232 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 146 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 136 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 97 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 39 | 4% |
| Engineering | 29 | 3% |
| Other | 167 | 19% |
| Unknown | 276 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 31 October 2022.
All research outputs
#758,603
of 25,708,267 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#47
of 1,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,262
of 247,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#3
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,708,267 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,406 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 247,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.