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 |
Comparing output from two methods of participatory design for developing implementation strategies: traditional contextual inquiry vs. rapid crowd sourcing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, July 2022
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-022-01220-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emily M. Becker-Haimes, Brinda Ramesh, Jacqueline E. Buck, Heather J. Nuske, Kelly A. Zentgraf, Rebecca E. Stewart, Alison Buttenheim, David S. Mandell |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 17 | 52% |
| Canada | 2 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 52% |
| Scientists | 15 | 45% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 11 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 13% |
| Psychology | 3 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 31 October 2023.
All research outputs
#1,787,792
of 25,286,324 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#333
of 1,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,316
of 428,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#8
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,286,324 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,795 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 well, scoring higher than 81% 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 428,426 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 68% of its contemporaries.