↓ Skip to main content

Facilitating access to pre-processed research evidence in public health

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, February 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
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
Facilitating access to pre-processed research evidence in public health
Published in
BMC Public Health, February 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-10-95
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paula Robeson, Maureen Dobbins, Kara DeCorby, Daiva Tirilis

Abstract

Evidence-informed decision making is accepted in Canada and worldwide as necessary for the provision of effective health services. This process involves: 1) clearly articulating a practice-based issue; 2) searching for and accessing relevant evidence; 3) appraising methodological rigor and choosing the most synthesized evidence of the highest quality and relevance to the practice issue and setting that is available; and 4) extracting, interpreting, and translating knowledge, in light of the local context and resources, into practice, program and policy decisions. While the public health sector in Canada is working toward evidence-informed decision making, considerable barriers, including efficient access to synthesized resources, exist.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 5 5%
Spain 2 2%
Norway 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 97 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 23%
Researcher 19 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Librarian 8 7%
Student > Bachelor 7 6%
Other 26 24%
Unknown 14 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 36%
Social Sciences 16 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 11%
Computer Science 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 18 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#3,110,498
of 24,885,505 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,651
of 16,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,095
of 99,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#14
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,885,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,532 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 99,059 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.