↓ Skip to main content

Studying policy implementation using a macro, meso and micro frame analysis: the case of the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
175 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
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

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.
Mendeley readers

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

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.