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 |
The effectiveness of health impact assessment in influencing decision-making in Australia and New Zealand 2005–2009
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1188 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fiona Haigh, Fran Baum, Andrew L Dannenberg, Mark F Harris, Ben Harris-Roxas, Helen Keleher, Lynn Kemp, Richard Morgan, Harrison NG Chok, Jeff Spickett, Elizabeth Harris |
| Abstract |
Health Impact Assessment (HIA) involves assessing how proposals may alter the determinants of health prior to implementation and recommends changes to enhance positive and mitigate negative impacts. HIAs growing use needs to be supported by a strong evidence base, both to validate the value of its application and to make its application more robust. We have carried out the first systematic empirical study of the influence of HIA on decision-making and implementation of proposals in Australia and New Zealand. This paper focuses on identifying whether and how HIAs changed decision-making and implementation and impacts that participants report following involvement in HIAs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 | 3 | 30% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 30% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 1% |
| India | 1 | 1% |
| Peru | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 85 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 11% |
| Researcher | 9 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 19% |
| Unknown | 25 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 11% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 8% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 27 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 11 May 2023.
All research outputs
#3,435,487
of 23,901,621 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#3,928
of 15,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,711
of 292,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#76
of 262 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,901,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,528 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 292,433 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 262 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 70% of its contemporaries.