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 an aged care specific leadership and management program on workforce, work environment, and care quality outcomes: design of a cluster randomised controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-8-126 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yun-Hee Jeon, Judy M. Simpson, Lynn Chenoweth, Michelle Cunich, Hal Kendig |
| Abstract |
A plethora of observational evidence exists concerning the impact of management and leadership on workforce, work environment, and care quality. Yet, no randomised controlled trial has been conducted to test the effectiveness of leadership and management interventions in aged care. An innovative aged care clinical leadership program (Clinical Leadership in Aged Care--CLiAC) was developed to improve managers' leadership capacities to support the delivery of quality care in Australia. This paper describes the study design of the cluster randomised controlled trial testing the effectiveness of the program. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 123 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 17% |
| Researcher | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 20% |
| Unknown | 36 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 18% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 15 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 10% |
| Psychology | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 40 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 January 2014.
All research outputs
#13,705,726
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,453
of 1,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,425
of 211,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#29
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 211,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.