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 |
Models of inter professional working for older people living at home: a survey and review of the local strategies of english health and social care statutory organisations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-11-337 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claire Goodman, Vari Drennan, Fiona Scheibl, Dhrushita Shah, Jill Manthorpe, Heather Gage, Steve Iliffe |
| Abstract |
Most services provided by health and social care organisations for older people living at home rely on interprofessional working (IPW). Although there is research investigating what supports and inhibits how professionals work together, less is known about how different service models deliver care to older people and how effectiveness is measured. The aim of this study was to describe how IPW for older people living at home is delivered, enacted and evaluated in England. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 18% |
| Researcher | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 11% |
| Librarian | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 22 | 23% |
| Unknown | 11 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 18% |
| Psychology | 9 | 9% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 18 | 19% |
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 11 April 2013.
All research outputs
#18,335,133
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,439
of 7,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,484
of 242,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#65
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 242,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.