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 |
Leadership in complex networks: the importance of network position and strategic action in a translational cancer research network
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-8-122 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Janet C. Long, Frances C. Cunningham, Janice Wiley, Peter Carswell, Jeffrey Braithwaite |
| Abstract |
Leadership behaviour in complex networks is under-researched, and little has been written concerning leadership of translational research networks (TRNs) that take discoveries made 'at the bench' and translate them into practices used 'at the bedside.' Understanding leaders' opportunities and behaviours within TRNs working to solve this key problem in implementing evidence into clinical practice is therefore important. This study explored the network position of governing body members and perceptions of their role in a new TRN in Sydney, Australia. The paper asks three questions: Firstly, do the formal, mandated leaders of this TRN hold key positions of centrality or brokerage in the informal social network of collaborative ties? Secondly, if so, do they recognise the leadership opportunities that their network positions afford them? Thirdly, what activities associated with these key roles do they believe will maximise the TRN's success? |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 141 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 19% |
| Researcher | 25 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 16% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 28 | 19% |
| Unknown | 23 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 37 | 25% |
| Psychology | 24 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 10 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 29 | 20% |
| Unknown | 26 | 18% |
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 10 December 2013.
All research outputs
#5,864,098
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,012
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,053
of 210,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#21
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 210,284 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 74% 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 is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.