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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Quality assurance of qualitative research: a review of the discourse
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-9-43 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joanna Reynolds, James Kizito, Nkoli Ezumah, Peter Mangesho, Elizabeth Allen, Clare Chandler |
| Abstract |
Increasing demand for qualitative research within global health has emerged alongside increasing demand for demonstration of quality of research, in line with the evidence-based model of medicine. In quantitative health sciences research, in particular clinical trials, there exist clear and widely-recognised guidelines for conducting quality assurance of research. However, no comparable guidelines exist for qualitative research and although there are long-standing debates on what constitutes 'quality' in qualitative research, the concept of 'quality assurance' has not been explored widely. In acknowledgement of this gap, we sought to review discourses around quality assurance of qualitative research, as a first step towards developing guidance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 38% |
| Spain | 2 | 25% |
| Japan | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 3 | 38% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 404 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 | 4 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 5 | 1% |
| Unknown | 384 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 86 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 58 | 14% |
| Researcher | 43 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 29 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 28 | 7% |
| Other | 85 | 21% |
| Unknown | 75 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 77 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 68 | 17% |
| Psychology | 38 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 24 | 6% |
| Other | 75 | 19% |
| Unknown | 90 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 08 February 2014.
All research outputs
#5,846,113
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#688
of 1,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,251
of 242,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#3
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,201 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 242,888 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.