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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Engaging national organizations for knowledge translation: Comparative case studies in knowledge value mapping
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, September 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-6-106 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joseph P Lane, Juan D Rogers |
| Abstract |
Government sponsors of research and development, along with their funded investigators, are increasingly tasked with demonstrating evidence of knowledge use by nontraditional audiences. This requires efforts to translate their findings for effective communication. For technology-related knowledge, these audiences include clinicians, consumers, manufacturers, public policy agencies, and knowledge brokers. One potentially efficient approach is to communicate research findings through relevant national organizations. However, this requires an understanding of how such organizations view and treat research knowledge, which can be determined through knowledge-value mapping. Do knowledge values differ between national organizations representing different audiences? Can a deeper understanding of knowledge values help sponsors, investigators, and organizations better communicate research findings to stakeholders? |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 3 | 3% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 20% |
| Researcher | 17 | 17% |
| Other | 9 | 9% |
| Librarian | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 23% |
| Unknown | 20 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 16 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 20% |
| Unknown | 24 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 23 May 2023.
All research outputs
#7,628,877
of 23,910,532 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,223
of 1,740 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,433
of 128,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#12
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,910,532 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,740 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 128,110 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.