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 |
Member Checking
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Qualitative Health Research, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1177/1049732316654870 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda Birt, Suzanne Scott, Debbie Cavers, Christine Campbell, Fiona Walter |
| Abstract |
The trustworthiness of results is the bedrock of high quality qualitative research. Member checking, also known as participant or respondent validation, is a technique for exploring the credibility of results. Data or results are returned to participants to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences. Member checking is often mentioned as one in a list of validation techniques. This simplistic reporting might not acknowledge the value of using the method, nor its juxtaposition with the interpretative stance of qualitative research. In this commentary, we critique how member checking has been used in published research, before describing and evaluating an innovative in-depth member checking technique, Synthesized Member Checking. The method was used in a study with patients diagnosed with melanoma. Synthesized Member Checking addresses the co-constructed nature of knowledge by providing participants with the opportunity to engage with, and add to, interview and interpreted data, several months after their semi-structured interview. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 | 7 | 29% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 13% |
| Ireland | 2 | 8% |
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 8% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Guyana | 1 | 4% |
| Malaysia | 1 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 58% |
| Scientists | 9 | 38% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2,881 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 2874 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 477 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 464 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 283 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 252 | 9% |
| Researcher | 169 | 6% |
| Other | 388 | 13% |
| Unknown | 848 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 461 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 357 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 210 | 7% |
| Psychology | 200 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 177 | 6% |
| Other | 528 | 18% |
| Unknown | 948 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 10 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,271,002
of 24,754,968 outputs
Outputs from Qualitative Health Research
#100
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,963
of 361,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Qualitative Health Research
#11
of 340 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,754,968 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 361,965 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 340 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.