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 |
Evaluating the effectiveness of a multifaceted, multilevel continuous quality improvement program in primary health care: developing a realist theory of change
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-8-119 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gill Schierhout, Jennifer Hains, Damin Si, Catherine Kennedy, Rhonda Cox, Ru Kwedza, Lynette O’Donoghue, Marea Fittock, Jenny Brands, Katherine Lonergan, Michelle Dowden, Ross Bailie |
| Abstract |
Variation in effectiveness of continuous quality improvement (CQI) interventions between services is commonly reported, but with little explanation of how contextual and other factors may interact to produce this variation. Therefore, there is scant information available on which policy makers can draw to inform effective implementation in different settings. In this paper, we explore how patterns of change in delivery of services may have been achieved in a diverse range of health centers participating in a wide-scale program to achieve improvements in quality of care for Indigenous Australians. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 13% |
| Canada | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 153 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 149 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 17% |
| Researcher | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 37 | 24% |
| Unknown | 25 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 12% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 6% |
| Psychology | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 16% |
| Unknown | 38 | 25% |
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 01 September 2014.
All research outputs
#4,626,336
of 25,311,095 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#849
of 1,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,630
of 217,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#19
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,311,095 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 217,560 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 53% of its contemporaries.