↓ Skip to main content

The problem with Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Quality & Safety, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 1,232)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
334 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
344 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
The problem with Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles
Published in
BMJ Quality & Safety, December 2015
DOI 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-005076
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie E Reed, Alan J Card

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 334 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 344 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 1%
Ireland 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 332 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 113 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 11%
Other 33 10%
Student > Postgraduate 29 8%
Student > Bachelor 29 8%
Other 103 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 127 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 81 24%
Unspecified 37 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 30 9%
Social Sciences 22 6%
Other 47 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 236. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#45,860
of 12,369,399 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Quality & Safety
#29
of 1,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,821
of 335,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Quality & Safety
#2
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,369,399 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 1,232 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.3. 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 335,943 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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 97% of its contemporaries.