↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Improving the normalization of complex interventions: measure development based on normalization process theory (NoMAD): study protocol

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
227 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Summary Twitter
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
Improving the normalization of complex interventions: measure development based on normalization process theory (NoMAD): study protocol
Published in
Implementation Science, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-8-43
Pubmed ID
23578304
Authors

Tracy L Finch, Tim Rapley, Melissa Girling, Frances S Mair, Elizabeth Murray, Shaun Treweek, Elaine McColl, Ian Nicholas Steen, Carl R May, Finch TL, Rapley T, Girling M, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, McColl E, Steen IN, May CR

Abstract

Understanding implementation processes is key to ensuring that complex interventions in healthcare are taken up in practice and thus maximize intended benefits for service provision and (ultimately) care to patients. Normalization Process Theory (NPT) provides a framework for understanding how a new intervention becomes part of normal practice. This study aims to develop and validate simple generic tools derived from NPT, to be used to improve the implementation of complex healthcare interventions.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 3 1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 215 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 47 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 20%
Student > Master 30 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Other 12 5%
Other 40 18%
Unknown 37 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 25%
Social Sciences 40 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 13%
Psychology 19 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 11 5%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 48 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 23 January 2017.
All research outputs
#3,897,919
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#783
of 1,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,883
of 199,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#11
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,720 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 199,475 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 67% of its contemporaries.

This page is provided by Altmetric.