↓ Skip to main content

Developing a framework to evaluate knowledge into action interventions

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
37 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Developing a framework to evaluate knowledge into action interventions
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-2930-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah Morton, Suzanne Wilson, Sheila Inglis, Karen Ritchie, Ann Wales

Abstract

There are many challenges in delivering and evaluating knowledge for healthcare, but the lack of clear routes from knowledge to practice is a root cause of failures in safety within healthcare. Various types and sources of knowledge are relevant at different levels within the healthcare system. These need to be delivered in a timely way that is useful and actionable for those providing services or developing policies. How knowledge is taken up and used through networks and relationships, and the difficulties in attributing change to knowledge-based interventions, present challenges to understanding how knowledge into action (K2A) work influences healthcare outcomes. This makes it difficult to demonstrate the importance of K2A work, and harness support for its development and resourcing. This paper presents the results from a project commissioned by NHS Education for Scotland (NES) and Healthcare Improvement Scotland (HIS) to create an evaluation framework to help understand the NHS Scotland Knowledge into Action model. The team took a developmental approach to creating an evaluation framework that would be useful and practical. This included a literature review to ensure the evaluation was evidence-based; adaptation of contribution analysis for K2A project; action research with K2A project leads to refine the work and develop suitable measures. Principles for evaluation and an evaluation framework based on contribution analysis were developed and implemented on a trial project. An outcomes chain was developed for the K2A programme and specific projects. This was used to design, collect and collate evidence of the K2A intervention. Data collected routinely by the intervention was supplemented with specific feedback measures from K2A project users. The evaluation approach allowed for scrutiny of both processes and outcomes and was adaptable to projects on different scales. This framework has proved useful as a planning, reflecting and evaluation tool for K2A, and could be more widely used to evidence the ways in which knowledge to action work helps improve healthcare outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Other 16 26%
Unknown 12 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 11 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Psychology 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 16 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 04 February 2019.
All research outputs
#1,063,853
of 24,224,854 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#279
of 8,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,724
of 335,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#8
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,224,854 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. 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 335,111 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.