↓ Skip to main content

Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work

Overview of attention for article published in Human Resources for Health, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#14 of 1,143)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
105 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
394 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1559 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
Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work
Published in
Human Resources for Health, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1478-4491-11-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan A Nancarrow, Andrew Booth, Steven Ariss, Tony Smith, Pam Enderby, Alison Roots

Abstract

Interdisciplinary team work is increasingly prevalent, supported by policies and practices that bring care closer to the patient and challenge traditional professional boundaries. To date, there has been a great deal of emphasis on the processes of team work, and in some cases, outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 105 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 1,559 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Ireland 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 1538 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 332 21%
Student > Bachelor 287 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 127 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 118 8%
Researcher 96 6%
Other 333 21%
Unknown 266 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 349 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 258 17%
Social Sciences 161 10%
Psychology 87 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 70 4%
Other 339 22%
Unknown 295 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 93. 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 08 December 2022.
All research outputs
#386,045
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Human Resources for Health
#14
of 1,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,792
of 193,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Resources for Health
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,143 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 193,995 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.