↓ Skip to main content

Using quantitative and qualitative data in health services research – what happens when mixed method findings conflict? [ISRCTN61522618]

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, December 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
138 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
399 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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.
Title
Using quantitative and qualitative data in health services research – what happens when mixed method findings conflict? [ISRCTN61522618]
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2006
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-6-28
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne Moffatt, Martin White, Joan Mackintosh, Denise Howel

Abstract

In this methodological paper we document the interpretation of a mixed methods study and outline an approach to dealing with apparent discrepancies between qualitative and quantitative research data in a pilot study evaluating whether welfare rights advice has an impact on health and social outcomes among a population aged 60 and over.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 399 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 2%
Malaysia 2 <1%
Mexico 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 376 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 88 22%
Student > Master 80 20%
Researcher 51 13%
Student > Bachelor 33 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 7%
Other 77 19%
Unknown 44 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 95 24%
Social Sciences 76 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 12%
Psychology 33 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 22 6%
Other 68 17%
Unknown 57 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 12 March 2020.
All research outputs
#1,773,110
of 18,920,065 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#698
of 6,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,691
of 196,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,920,065 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 196,704 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them