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 |
Conducting retrospective impact analysis to inform a medical research charity’s funding strategies: the case of Asthma UK
|
---|---|
Published in |
Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology, May 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1710-1492-9-17 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Stephen R Hanney, Amanda Watt, Teresa H Jones, Leanne Metcalf |
Abstract |
Debate is intensifying about how to assess the full range of impacts from medical research. Complexity increases when assessing the diverse funding streams of funders such as Asthma UK, a charitable patient organisation supporting medical research to benefit people with asthma. This paper aims to describe the various impacts identified from a range of Asthma UK research, and explore how Asthma UK utilised the characteristics of successful funding approaches to inform future research strategies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 Kingdom | 4 | 67% |
Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 1 | 2% |
South Africa | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 57 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 12 | 20% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 14% |
Other | 6 | 10% |
Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
Professor | 5 | 8% |
Other | 8 | 14% |
Unknown | 14 | 24% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 20% |
Social Sciences | 12 | 20% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
Psychology | 2 | 3% |
Other | 7 | 12% |
Unknown | 19 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 November 2013.
All research outputs
#6,996,781
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#373
of 924 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,856
of 205,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Allergy, Asthma & Clinical Immunology
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 924 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 205,280 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.