↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the implementation of health and safety innovations under a regulatory context: A collective case study of Ontario’s safer needle regulation

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Evaluating the implementation of health and safety innovations under a regulatory context: A collective case study of Ontario’s safer needle regulation
Published in
Implementation Science, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-8-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Chambers, Cameron A Mustard, Curtis Breslin, Linn Holness, Kathryn Nichol

Abstract

Implementation effectiveness models have identified important factors that can promote the successful implementation of an innovation; however, these models have been examined within contexts where innovations are adopted voluntarily and often ignore the socio-political and environmental context. In the field of occupational health and safety, there are circumstances where organizations must adopt innovations to comply with a regulatory standard. Examining how the external environment can facilitate or challenge an organization's change process may add to our understanding of implementation effectiveness. The objective of this study is to describe implementation facilitators and barriers in the context of a regulation designed to promote the uptake of safer engineered medical devices in healthcare.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 54 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 23%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Social Sciences 8 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 9%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 13 23%
Unknown 11 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 March 2013.
All research outputs
#13,144,039
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,379
of 1,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,602
of 279,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#25
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 279,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.