↓ Skip to main content

Leading for the long haul: a mixed-method evaluation of the Sustainment Leadership Scale (SLS)

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, January 2018
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
29 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Leading for the long haul: a mixed-method evaluation of the Sustainment Leadership Scale (SLS)
Published in
Implementation Science, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13012-018-0710-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark G. Ehrhart, Elisa M. Torres, Amy E. Green, Elise M. Trott, Cathleen E. Willging, Joanna C. Moullin, Gregory A. Aarons

Abstract

Despite our progress in understanding the organizational context for implementation and specifically the role of leadership in implementation, its role in sustainment has received little attention. This paper took a mixed-method approach to examine leadership during the sustainment phase of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment (EPIS) framework. Utilizing the Implementation Leadership Scale as a foundation, we sought to develop a short, practical measure of sustainment leadership that can be used for both applied and research purposes. Data for this study were collected as a part of a larger mixed-method study of evidence-based intervention, SafeCare®, sustainment. Quantitative data were collected from 157 providers using web-based surveys. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine the factor structure of the Sustainment Leadership Scale (SLS). Qualitative data were collected from 95 providers who participated in one of 15 focus groups. A framework approach guided qualitative data analysis. Mixed-method integration was also utilized to examine convergence of quantitative and qualitative findings. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the a priori higher order factor structure of the SLS with subscales indicating a single higher order sustainment leadership factor. The SLS demonstrated excellent internal consistency reliability. Qualitative analyses offered support for the dimensions of sustainment leadership captured by the quantitative measure, in addition to uncovering a fifth possible factor, available leadership. This study found qualitative and quantitative support for the pragmatic SLS measure. The SLS can be used for assessing leadership of first-level leaders to understand how staff perceive leadership during sustainment and to suggest areas where leaders could direct more attention in order to increase the likelihood that EBIs are institutionalized into the normal functioning of the organization.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Librarian 2 8%
Other 6 24%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 5 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Environmental Science 2 8%
Psychology 2 8%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 6 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 30 January 2018.
All research outputs
#1,027,460
of 14,101,645 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#317
of 1,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,566
of 358,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,101,645 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,419 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 358,301 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.