↓ Skip to main content

Participants’ perceptions of a knowledge-brokering strategy to facilitate evidence-informed policy-making in Fiji

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, August 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Participants’ perceptions of a knowledge-brokering strategy to facilitate evidence-informed policy-making in Fiji
Published in
BMC Public Health, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-725
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gade Waqa, Helen Mavoa, Wendy Snowdon, Marj Moodie, Rigieta Nadakuitavuki, Marita Mc Cabe, Boyd Swinburn

Abstract

Evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) is optimal when evidence-producers (researchers) and policy developers work collaboratively to ensure the production and use of the best available evidence. This paper examined participants' perceptions of knowledge-brokering strategies used in the TROPIC (Translational Research in Obesity Prevention in Communities) project to facilitate the use of obesity-related evidence in policy development in Fiji.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 89 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 23%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 10%
Librarian 6 7%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 11 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 29%
Social Sciences 14 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 12%
Arts and Humanities 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 14 15%

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 13 August 2013.
All research outputs
#7,762,098
of 12,372,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,312
of 8,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,356
of 151,415 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#40
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 151,415 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.