| Title |
Engaging policy-makers, health system managers, and policy analysts in the knowledge synthesis process: a scoping review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-018-0717-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrea C. Tricco, Wasifa Zarin, Patricia Rios, Vera Nincic, Paul A. Khan, Marco Ghassemi, Sanober Diaz, Ba’ Pham, Sharon E. Straus, Etienne V. Langlois |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 151 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 24 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 13 | 9% |
| United States | 12 | 8% |
| South Africa | 10 | 7% |
| Australia | 8 | 5% |
| Ireland | 5 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 4 | 3% |
| Lebanon | 3 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Unknown | 55 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 94 | 62% |
| Scientists | 35 | 23% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 15 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 233 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 233 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 37 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 7% |
| Professor | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 47 | 20% |
| Unknown | 57 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 37 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 35 | 15% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 3% |
| Psychology | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 30 | 13% |
| Unknown | 80 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 97. 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 14 December 2022.
All research outputs
#447,716
of 25,914,360 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#28
of 1,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,800
of 458,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#1
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,914,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,823 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 458,201 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 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 98% of its contemporaries.