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 effect of provider- and workflow-focused strategies for guideline implementation on provider acceptance
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Implementation Science, October 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-4-71 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mindy E Flanagan, Rangaraj Ramanujam, Bradley N Doebbeling |
| Abstract |
The effective implementation of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) depends critically on the extent to which the strategies that are deployed for implementing the guidelines promote provider acceptance of CPGs. Such implementation strategies can be classified into two types based on whether they primarily target providers (e.g., academic detailing, grand rounds presentations) or the work context (e.g., computer reminders, modifications to forms). This study investigated the independent and joint effects of these two types of implementation strategies on provider acceptance of CPGs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 65 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 24% |
| Unknown | 12 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 13% |
| Psychology | 8 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 17 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2011.
All research outputs
#18,293,967
of 22,649,029 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,639
of 1,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,884
of 94,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,649,029 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,715 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 94,091 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.