↓ Skip to main content

RE-AIM in Clinical, Community, and Corporate Settings: Perspectives, Strategies, and Recommendations to Enhance Public Health Impact

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
129 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
223 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
RE-AIM in Clinical, Community, and Corporate Settings: Perspectives, Strategies, and Recommendations to Enhance Public Health Impact
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00071
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samantha M. Harden, Matthew Lee Smith, Marcia G. Ory, Renae L. Smith-Ray, Paul A. Estabrooks, Russell E. Glasgow

Abstract

The RE-AIM Framework is a planning and evaluation model that has been used in a variety of settings to address various programmatic, environmental, and policy innovations for improving population health. In addition to the broad application and diverse use of the framework, there are lessons learned and recommendations for the future use of the framework across clinical, community, and corporate settings. The purposes of this article are to: (A) provide a brief overview of the RE-AIM Framework and its pragmatic use for planning and evaluation; (B) offer recommendations to facilitate the application of RE-AIM in clinical, community, and corporate settings; and (C) share perspectives and lessons learned about employing RE-AIM dimensions in the planning, implementation, and evaluation phases within these different settings. In this article, we demonstrate how the RE-AIM concepts and elements within each dimension can be applied by researchers and practitioners in diverse settings, among diverse populations and for diverse health topics.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 223 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 223 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 19%
Researcher 33 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 8%
Professor 12 5%
Other 42 19%
Unknown 50 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 11%
Social Sciences 24 11%
Psychology 16 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 4%
Other 42 19%
Unknown 68 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 September 2019.
All research outputs
#6,609,433
of 24,974,461 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,457
of 13,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,979
of 338,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#55
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,974,461 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 13,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 338,082 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 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 50% of its contemporaries.