↓ Skip to main content

Research impact: a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • 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

blogs
5 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
316 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
208 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
532 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
Research impact: a narrative review
Published in
BMC Medicine, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12916-016-0620-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Trisha Greenhalgh, James Raftery, Steve Hanney, Matthew Glover

Abstract

Impact occurs when research generates benefits (health, economic, cultural) in addition to building the academic knowledge base. Its mechanisms are complex and reflect the multiple ways in which knowledge is generated and utilised. Much progress has been made in measuring both the outcomes of research and the processes and activities through which these are achieved, though the measurement of impact is not without its critics. We review the strengths and limitations of six established approaches (Payback, Research Impact Framework, Canadian Academy of Health Sciences, monetisation, societal impact assessment, UK Research Excellence Framework) plus recently developed and largely untested ones (including metrics and electronic databases). We conclude that (1) different approaches to impact assessment are appropriate in different circumstances; (2) the most robust and sophisticated approaches are labour-intensive and not always feasible or affordable; (3) whilst most metrics tend to capture direct and proximate impacts, more indirect and diffuse elements of the research-impact link can and should be measured; and (4) research on research impact is a rapidly developing field with new methodologies on the horizon.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 316 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 532 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 519 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 90 17%
Student > Master 85 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 72 14%
Other 36 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 24 5%
Other 106 20%
Unknown 119 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 115 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 66 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 40 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 26 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 4%
Other 117 22%
Unknown 149 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 235. 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 17 November 2022.
All research outputs
#165,396
of 25,840,929 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#148
of 4,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,149
of 349,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,840,929 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 4,098 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.2. 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 349,870 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 37 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.