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 |
Determinants for the effectiveness of implementing an occupational therapy intervention in routine dementia care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-8-131 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carola M. E. Döpp, Maud J. L. Graff, Marcel G. M. Olde Rikkert, Maria W. G. Nijhuis van der Sanden, Myrra J. F. J. Vernooij-Dassen |
| Abstract |
A multifaceted implementation (MFI) strategy was used to implement an evidence-based occupational therapy program for people with dementia (COTiD program). This strategy was successful in increasing the number of referrals, but not in improving occupational therapists' (OTs) adherence. Therefore, a process evaluation was conducted to identify factors that influenced the effectiveness of the MFI strategy. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Georgia | 1 | 14% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Germany | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 162 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 30 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 13% |
| Researcher | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 9% |
| Other | 33 | 20% |
| Unknown | 31 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 33 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 12% |
| Psychology | 16 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 38 | 23% |
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 27 November 2013.
All research outputs
#6,214,879
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,080
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,930
of 215,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#22
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 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 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 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 215,614 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 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.