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 |
Studying policy implementation using a macro, meso and micro frame analysis: the case of the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research & Care (CLAHRC) programme nationally and in North West London
|
---|---|
Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2012
|
DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-10-32 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Sarah EM Caldwell, Nicholas Mays |
Abstract |
The publication of Best research for best health in 2006 and the "ring-fencing" of health research funding in England marked the start of a period of change for health research governance and the structure of research funding in England. One response to bridging the 'second translational gap' between research knowledge and clinical practice was the establishment of nine Collaborations for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRCs). The goal of this paper is to assess how national-level understanding of the aims and objectives of the CLAHRCs translated into local implementation and practice in North West London. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 175 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
Canada | 3 | 2% |
Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 168 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 18% |
Student > Master | 22 | 13% |
Researcher | 19 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 14 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 6% |
Other | 40 | 23% |
Unknown | 38 | 22% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Social Sciences | 40 | 23% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 21% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 9% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 5% |
Psychology | 8 | 5% |
Other | 21 | 12% |
Unknown | 45 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 October 2012.
All research outputs
#15,255,201
of 22,684,168 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#1,076
of 1,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,966
of 174,094 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,684,168 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,203 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 174,094 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.