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 |
Capturing lessons learned from evidence-to-policy initiatives through structured reflection
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Research Policy and Systems, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1478-4505-12-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fadi El-Jardali, John Lavis, Kaelan Moat, Tomas Pantoja, Nour Ataya |
| Abstract |
Knowledge translation platforms (KTPs), which are partnerships between policymakers, stakeholders, and researchers, are being established in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to enhance evidence-informed health policymaking (EIHP). This study aims to gain a better understanding of the i) activities conducted by KTPs, ii) the way in which KTP leaders, policymakers, and stakeholders perceive these activities and their outputs, iii) facilitators that support KTP work and challenges, and the lessons learned for overcoming such challenges, and iv) factors that can help to ensure the sustainability of KTPs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 7 | 27% |
| Luxembourg | 2 | 8% |
| Chile | 2 | 8% |
| United States | 2 | 8% |
| Turkey | 1 | 4% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 4% |
| Brazil | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 19 | 73% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 19% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 213 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% |
| Unknown | 211 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 40 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 39 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 37 | 17% |
| Other | 17 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 34 | 16% |
| Unknown | 36 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 48 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 24 | 11% |
| Engineering | 6 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 35 | 16% |
| Unknown | 47 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 06 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,857,785
of 25,517,918 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#218
of 1,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,746
of 320,666 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,517,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,393 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 320,666 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.