↓ Skip to main content

REsearch into implementation STrategies to support patients of different ORigins and language background in a variety of European primary care settings (RESTORE): study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
138 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
REsearch into implementation STrategies to support patients of different ORigins and language background in a variety of European primary care settings (RESTORE): study protocol
Published in
Implementation Science, November 2012
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-7-111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne MacFarlane, Catherine O’Donnell, Frances Mair, Mary O’Reilly-de Brún, Tomas de Brún, Wolfgang Spiegel, Maria van den Muijsenbergh, Evelyn van Weel-Baumgarten, Christos Lionis, Nicola Burns, Katja Gravenhorst, Christine Princz, Erik Teunissen, Francine van den Driessen Mareeuw, Aristoula Saridaki, Maria Papadakaki, Maria Vlahadi, Christopher Dowrick

Abstract

The implementation of guidelines and training initiatives to support communication in cross-cultural primary care consultations is ad hoc across a range of international settings with negative consequences particularly for migrants. This situation reflects a well-documented translational gap between evidence and practice and is part of the wider problem of implementing guidelines and the broader range of professional educational and quality interventions in routine practice. In this paper, we describe our use of a contemporary social theory, Normalization Process Theory and participatory research methodology--Participatory Learning and Action--to investigate and support implementation of such guidelines and training initiatives in routine practice.

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 138 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 133 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 20%
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 7%
Other 27 20%
Unknown 28 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 24%
Social Sciences 20 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 14%
Psychology 11 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 32 23%
Attention Score in Context

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 28 April 2013.
All research outputs
#6,383,652
of 22,685,926 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,111
of 1,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,399
of 275,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#16
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,685,926 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 275,819 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 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.