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 evaluation of enhanced feedback interventions to reduce unnecessary blood transfusions (AFFINITIE): protocol for two linked cluster randomised factorial controlled trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13012-017-0614-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suzanne Hartley, Robbie Foy, Rebecca E. A. Walwyn, Robert Cicero, Amanda J. Farrin, Jill J. Francis, Fabiana Lorencatto, Natalie J. Gould, John Grant-Casey, Jeremy M. Grimshaw, Liz Glidewell, Susan Michie, Stephen Morris, Simon J. Stanworth, for the AFFINITIE programme |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 12 | 41% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Singapore | 1 | 3% |
| Colombia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 48% |
| Scientists | 9 | 31% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 27 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 14% |
| Psychology | 4 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 31 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 20 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,124,409
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#417
of 1,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,334
of 329,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#14
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 329,874 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 38 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 63% of its contemporaries.