↓ Skip to main content

An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#10 of 337)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

3 blogs
196 tweeters
2 Facebook pages


224 Dimensions

Readers on

911 Mendeley
3 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.
An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist
Published in
BMC Psychology, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40359-015-0089-9
Pubmed ID

Mark S. Bauer, Laura Damschroder, Hildi Hagedorn, Jeffrey Smith, Amy M. Kilbourne


The movement of evidence-based practices (EBPs) into routine clinical usage is not spontaneous, but requires focused efforts. The field of implementation science has developed to facilitate the spread of EBPs, including both psychosocial and medical interventions for mental and physical health concerns. The authors aim to introduce implementation science principles to non-specialist investigators, administrators, and policymakers seeking to become familiar with this emerging field. This introduction is based on published literature and the authors' experience as researchers in the field, as well as extensive service as implementation science grant reviewers. Implementation science is "the scientific study of methods to promote the systematic uptake of research findings and other EBPs into routine practice, and, hence, to improve the quality and effectiveness of health services." Implementation science is distinct from, but shares characteristics with, both quality improvement and dissemination methods. Implementation studies can be either assess naturalistic variability or measure change in response to planned intervention. Implementation studies typically employ mixed quantitative-qualitative designs, identifying factors that impact uptake across multiple levels, including patient, provider, clinic, facility, organization, and often the broader community and policy environment. Accordingly, implementation science requires a solid grounding in theory and the involvement of trans-disciplinary research teams. The business case for implementation science is clear: As healthcare systems work under increasingly dynamic and resource-constrained conditions, evidence-based strategies are essential in order to ensure that research investments maximize healthcare value and improve public health. Implementation science plays a critical role in supporting these efforts.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 196 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 911 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
India 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 897 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 182 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 153 17%
Student > Master 136 15%
Other 73 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 73 8%
Other 198 22%
Unknown 96 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 242 27%
Social Sciences 127 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 121 13%
Psychology 106 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 2%
Other 126 14%
Unknown 169 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 147. 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 13 February 2020.
All research outputs
of 14,361,097 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
of 337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 249,342 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,361,097 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 249,342 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them