↓ 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 302)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
192 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
165 Dimensions

Readers on

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

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

Abstract

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 192 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 780 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%
Brazil 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 766 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 162 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 133 17%
Student > Master 111 14%
Unspecified 77 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 67 9%
Other 230 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 204 26%
Unspecified 140 18%
Social Sciences 111 14%
Psychology 104 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 98 13%
Other 123 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 140. 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 09 September 2019.
All research outputs
#105,041
of 13,521,117 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#10
of 302 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,835
of 247,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,521,117 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 302 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.3. 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 247,717 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