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 |
Methods of a multi-faceted rapid knowledge synthesis project to inform the implementation of a new health service model: Collaborative Emergency Centres
|
---|---|
Published in |
Systematic Reviews, January 2015
|
DOI | 10.1186/2046-4053-4-7 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Jill A Hayden, Lara Killian, Austin Zygmunt, Jessica Babineau, Ruth Martin-Misener, Jan L Jensen, Alix J Carter |
Abstract |
The aim of this rapid knowledge synthesis was to provide relevant research evidence to inform the implementation of a new health service in Nova Scotia, Canada: Collaborative Emergency Centres (CECs). CECs propose to deliver both primary and urgent care to rural populations where traditional delivery is a challenge. This paper reports on the methods used in a rapid knowledge synthesis project to provide timely evidence to policy makers about this novel healthcare delivery model. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
Canada | 1 | 14% |
Unknown | 5 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
Scientists | 2 | 29% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
United States | 1 | 1% |
Unknown | 92 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 14 | 15% |
Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
Librarian | 8 | 9% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 9% |
Professor | 7 | 7% |
Other | 19 | 20% |
Unknown | 27 | 29% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 22% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 14% |
Social Sciences | 12 | 13% |
Psychology | 3 | 3% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 2% |
Other | 15 | 16% |
Unknown | 28 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#7,257,925
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,316
of 2,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,635
of 365,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#30
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,218 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 365,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.