↓ Skip to main content

Exploring mentorship as a strategy to build capacity for knowledge translation research and practice: a scoping systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, September 2014
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
25 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
178 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Exploring mentorship as a strategy to build capacity for knowledge translation research and practice: a scoping systematic review
Published in
Implementation Science, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/s13012-014-0122-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anna R Gagliardi, Fiona Webster, Laure Perrier, Mary Bell, Sharon Straus

Abstract

Knowledge translation (KT) supports use of evidence in healthcare decision making but is not widely practiced. Mentoring is a promising means of developing KT capacity. The purpose of this scoping systematic review was to identify essential components of mentoring that could be adapted for KT mentorship.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 173 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 17%
Researcher 24 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 7%
Other 9 5%
Other 28 16%
Unknown 52 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 19%
Social Sciences 28 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 3%
Psychology 5 3%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 62 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 03 March 2015.
All research outputs
#2,290,797
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#464
of 1,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,449
of 259,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#10
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 74% 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 259,404 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 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.